( 


M 


! 

55 

nj 

»  ^ 

CL 

J^ 

1 ' 

.^ 

_w 

,^ 

i 

« 

0       , 

.»^^ 

15 

1 

•** 

Hi 

Q. 

1 

^-W 

*^ 

1^ 

0 

^ 

^ 

$ 

o 

^ 

c 

t^ 

0 

bfl 

r\ 

^ 

&^ 

<t 

^ 

w 

0 

3 

5^ 

S 

E 

.^ 

•c^ 

M 

CJ 

"»«2 

J^ 

rt 

C/) 

1^ 

-»-' 

s*-* 

P4 

:s 

"! 

<k 

^ 

« 

-0 

c 

8 

>* 

a> 

^ 

2 

s 

^ 

d: 

S) 

'^ 

Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2011  with  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/attempttoanswerqOOvanv 


AN  ATTEMPT 


TO    ANSWER    THE     QUESTION 


WHOSE    CHILDREN  ARE    EN- 
TITLED TO  BAPTISM? 


BY 

I.  A.I^AN  vra: 


NKEN, 

PASTOR  OF    THE   REFORMED   DTJTCH  CHURCH   IN  BHOOME-StREET, 
NE W-YO  RK. 


new-york: 
john  moffet,  112  canal-street. 

1841. 


H.  LUnWIG,  PEINTEK, 

72  Vesey-st.,  N.  Y. 


\5p> 


PREFATORY  REMARlS.   ^ 


The  importance  of  the  subject  discussed 
in  the  following  chapters  will  hardly  be  de- 
nied. If  it  be  important  that  our  children  be 
baptized  at  all,  it  is  important  that  all  should 
be,  that  are  entitled  to  the  ordinance.  The 
question  of  right  has  greatly  agitated  our 
churches,  and  notwithstanding  the  signal  de  - 
feat  that  was  sustained  by  the  advocates  of 
the  exclusive  system,  in  the  decision  of  the 
Synod  of  '34,  opinions  remain  unchanged. 
Many  are  still  grieved  that  their  children  are 
refused  a  place  in  the  church,  while  they 
consider  them  entitled  to  that  privilege.  On 
the  other  hand,  conscience  is  pleaded  for  re- 
jecting them,  as  if  it  would  be  a  profanation 
of  holy  things  to  receive  them.  Nothing  can 
produce  uniformity  of  practice,  but  uniformity 
in  the  principles  adopted  ;  and  any  thing  that 
looks  like  an  approximation  to  this,  must  be 
the  result,  not  of  S3aiodical  decisions,  but  of 
free  and  friendly  discussion. 


4  PREFATORY    REMARKS. 

Under  this  conviction,  the  writer  was  dis- 
posed to  commence  such  a  discussion  in  the 
cohimns  of  the  Christian  Intelhgencer.  But 
the  prudent  Editors,  fearful  of  the  strife  of 
pens,  apprehended  inconvenience  from  the 
design,  and  it  was  abandoned.  The  subject, 
however,  continued  to  occupy  a  portion  of  at- 
tention, and  the  following  essay  is  the  result. 
It  would  perhaps  be  a  piece  of  vanity  to  an- 
ticipate more  from  its  publication,  than  the 
calling  of  the  minds  of  our  ministers  and  peo- 
ple in  some  degree  to  the  claims  of  our  chil- 
dren. The  truth  lies  somewhere,  and  although 
w^e  have  no  reason  to  look  for  entire  uniformi- 
ty of  opinion  on  any  subject,  yet  I  see  noth- 
ing to  forbid  the  hope,  that  candour,  judgment, 
and  the  love  of  truth,  applied  to  the  investiga- 
tion, may  do  much  towards  effecting  a  greater 
degree  of  unity  on  this  question,  than  at  pre- 
sent exists. 

It  is  somewhat  surprising,  that  on  a  subject 
so  important,  and  on  which  so  much  feeling 
has  been  enlisted,  so  little  should  have  been 
written.  It  has  so  happened,  that  nothing  has 
come  under  my  observation  on  that  side  of  the 


PREFATORY    REMARKS.  5 

question  which  I  advocate,  besides  what  is 
contained  in  the  ''  Magnaha."  I  have  conse- 
qiiently  been  compelled  to  pursue  my  way, 
without  the  benefit  of  those  helps,  which  re- 
sult to  writers  from  the  labours  of  predeces- 
sors in  the  same  cause.  This  rer^ark  is  sub- 
mitted to  the  consideration  of  those  who  may 
feel  the  desirableness  of  greater  fulness  of  ar- 
gument and  illustration,  than  they  will  find  in 
the  essay.  I  have  done  the  best  I  could  in 
the  circumstances ;  and  if  some  one,  or  more, 
better  qualified  to  do  justice  to  the  cause, 
should  give  that  completeness  to  the  discus- 
sion, wliich  it  may  be  thought  I  have  failed  to 
give,  I  shall  be  content  to  be  forgotten  ;  and 
shall  cheerfully  join  with  others  in  a  vote  of 
thanks,  to  whomsoever  shall  so  defend  the 
cause  of  our  children,  that  the  injustice  of  re- 
fusing them  a  place  in  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord,  shall  be  universally  felt,  and  the  practice 
of  rejecting  them  shall  cease  from  the  church. 
In  support  of  the  opposite  view  of  the 
question,  more  has  been  written.  But  even 
here,  the  great  mass  of  writers  on  the  gene- 
ral subject  of  infant  baptism,  appear  to  have 


b  PREFATORY    REMARKS. 

taken  for  granted,  that  none  but  the  children 
of  the  truly  pious  were  entitled  to  be  receiv- 
ed into  the  church.  This  has  not  been  the 
case  with  all ;  and  to  two  of  this  class  I  have 
paid  some  attention.  The  high  character  of 
the  Doctors  Wardlaw  and  Cuyler,  entitle 
them  to  the  unqualified  respect  and  affection 
of  the  Christian  public.  The  former  I  know 
only  from  his  writings :  the  latter  I  know  per- 
sonally, and  I  esteem  it  a  privilege  thus  to 
know  him.  Placed  by  the  providence  of  God 
in  a  situation  to  trace  his  footsteps  as  a  man 
and  a  minister,  I  have  more  than  his  public 
reputation  to  inspire  my  affection.  He  would 
rebuke  me  for  saying  more,  and  I  cannot  be 
satisfied  with  saying  less,  than  that  I  could 
hardly  respect  myself  if  I  did  not  love  him. 

Still,  I  have  spoken  of  the  sentiments  of 
these  standard-bearers,  as  I  should  have  spo- 
ken of  them,  had  they  proceeded  from  the 
mere  rank  and  file  of  the  host  of  God.  And 
is  not  this  right  ?  Sentiments  in  philosophy 
or  politics,  in  morals  or  religion,  are  distinct 
from  their  authors.  They  must  exist  by  their 
own  principle  of  vitality,  or  die.     Their  pro- 


PREFATORY    REMARKS.  7 

perties  too,  are  just  what  they  are,  beautiful 
or  deformed,  wholesome  or  pernicious,  true 
or  erroneous  ;  and  as  they  are,  so  should  their 
treatment  be. 

These  remarks  are  offered  in  place  of  an 
apology,  for  any  thing  that  might  appear  too 
free,  in  the  manner  in  which  I  have  spoken  of 
the  sentiments  of  others.  I  have  spoken 
after  my  own  way,  which  it  would  have  cost 
me  an  unpleasant  effort  to  avoid.  If  the 
reader  camiot  justify,  he  may  forgive.  If  he 
camiot  forgive,  he  may  condemn.  I  shall  not 
appeal  from  his  judgment.  No  one  can  ask 
more  than  to  have  his  ow^n  way.  This  I  am 
willing  to  grant ;  and  with  such  a  feeling,  in 
connection  with  an  earnest  prayer  and  hope, 
that  some  good  may  be  done,  I  submit  what 
I  have  written  to  the  judgment  of  the  Chris- 
tian public. 


CHAPTER  I. 

OF  THE  VISIBLE  CHURCH. 

The  foundation  of  the  visible  clmrcli  is 
laid  in  the  promise,  ''  I  will  be  a  God  to  thee, 
and  to  thy  seed  after  thee  in  their  generations, 
for  an  everlasting  covenant."  By  this  pro- 
mise, a  peculiar  relation  was  established  be- 
tween God  and  the  family  of  the  Patriarch. 
Circumcision  Avas  established  as  a  sign,  token, 
or  seal  of  the  covenant ;  and  those  who  re- 
ceived it,  were  henceforward  to  be  considered 
as  in  the  enjoyment  of  church  privileges. 
The  family  of  Abraham  was  organized  into 
a  chu7xh. 

What  is  the  nature  of  the  relation  implied 
in  the  promise,  "  I  will  be  a  God  to  thee  ?" 
This  promise,  if  it  stood  alone,  would  very 
naturally  be  understood  to  express  the  rela- 
tion, w^hich  is  established  in  the  regeneration 
of  the  soul  to  God.  But  in  the  first  place,  it 
is  to  be  observed,  that  the  promise  is  made 
with  direct  reference  to  the  establishment  of 


OF    THE    VISIBLE    CHURCH.      -.V,    ^    ft 

a  visible  church.  In  the  liighest  spiritual 
sense,  God  was  as  much  the  God  of  Lot,  as 
of  Abraham.  Lot  belonged  to  the  body  of 
true  believers,  but  with  the  visible  church,  or 
that  body  which  was  organized  in  the  family 
of  Abraham,  he  had  no  connection.  In  re- 
ference to  it,  therefore,  God  was  not  his  God; 
no  such  promise  having  been  made  to  him. 
And  secondly,  the  same  relation,  as  that  es- 
tablished by  the  promise  with  Abraham,  was 
also  established  with  his  children.  "  I  will 
be  a  God  to  thee,  and  to  thy  seed  after  thee^ 
It  will  not  be  pretended,  that  the  children  of 
Abraham,  at  eight  days  old,  when  the  cove^ 
nant  was  to  be  ratified  by  the  application  of 
the  seal,  exercised  the  faith  of  their  father ; 
or  that  universally,  at  any  subsequent  age, 
they  were  the  regenerated  sons  of  God.  It 
was  enough  that  they  were  the  sons  of  Abra- 
ham, to  bring  them  within  the  scope  of  the 
covenant.  The  church  was  not  constituted  to 
be  an  immaculate  body  of  saints,  but  an 
organized  community,  acknowledging  the 
true  God,  as  the  only  proper  object  of  reli' 
gious  worship — a  community  to  which  revC' 


10  OF    THE  VISIBLE    CHURCH. 

lations  of  the  divine  will  were  to  be  made ; 
and  which  was  to  preserve,  and  hand  down 
these  revelations,  through  successive  genera- 
tions. "  To  them  were  committed  the  ora- 
cles of  God."  With  the  preservation  of  the 
divine  oracles,  was  connected  their  use,  which 
would  be  blessed  to  the  salvation  of  many  in 
Israel. 

In  the  administration  of  the  initiatory  rite 
to  those  who  were  entitled  to  receive  it,  the 
church  received  its  formal  organization.  The 
circumcised  coinjwsed  the  chu7xh  as  much 
theU)  as  they  ever  did  afterwards ;  and  as 
much  as  the  baptized  do  now.  The  favours 
which  w^ere  subsequently  conferred  through 
the  ministry  of  Moses,  in  specific  directions 
for  the  w^orship  of  God,  and  in  various  signifi- 
cant appointments,  adjusted  to  the  promise, 
and  which  in  their  influence  when  rightly 
used,  would  concm'  with  the  word  in  the  pro- 
motion of  spiritual  ends,  were  conferred  upon 
the  chw'ch  as  already  organized.  The  du- 
ties enjoined  were  enjoined  upon  the  church. 
The  promises  made,  were  made  to  the  church. 
The    fundamental  laws    of   the   community 


OF   THE  VISIBLE   CHURCH.  11 

were  not  altered  nor  modified ;  no  new  reli- 
gious qualifications  w^ere  enjoined — no  new 
tests  of  any  kind  established  for  the  admis- 
sion of  members.  In  these  respects,  Moses 
left  the  chiu-ch  as  he  found  it,  bomid  to  God 
in  the  original  and  everlasting  covenant. 

By  the  law,  or  promise,  establishing  the 
visible  church,  an  inclosure  was  made,  in 
which  were  to  be  found,  not  only  polished 
stones,  but  also  a  mass  of  rude  materials, 
placed  there  to  be  subjected  to  the  action  of 
the  instrumentalities  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 
Such  materials  w^ere  the  Jewish  children, 
brought  m  at  eight  days  old ;  and  such  many 
of  them  always  remained.  The  instrumen- 
talities were  the  word  and  ordinances  of  the 
church ;  and  by  the  action  of  these,  under  the 
influence  of  the  Spirit,  many  "  lively  stones" 
were  produced,  and  assigned  to  their  place  in 
the  spiritual  temple.  Such  was,  and  such  is, 
the  precise  nature  of  the  visible  church. 
With  regard  to  all  who  are  within  the  inclo- 
sure, the  circumstance  of  their  being  there, 
and  having  God's  mark  upon  them,  implies 
that  they  are  in  covenant  in  the  sense  of  the 


12  OF  THE  VISIBLE    CHURCH. 

promise  ;  and  consequently,  that  they  sustain 
the  relation  intended  to  be  estabUshed  by  it, 
as  the  charter  of  the  visible  church's  organi- 
zation. God  is  their  God.  He  receives  them 
in  w^hile  infants,  and  puts  his  mark  upon  them, 
as  those  to  whom  he  designs  to  secure  the 
enjoyment  of  the  means  of  grace  ;  not  be- 
cause they  are  believing,  but  that  they  may  be 
placed  in  the  enjoyment  of  those  means,  by 
which  faith  is  produced  and  strengthened. 
If,  after  they  have  arrived  at  maturity  of 
years  and  understanding,  they  are  found  no 
better  than  when  first  admitted,  the  end  of 
their  admission  is  yet  to  be  answered;  and 
the  same  general  reason,  which  at  first  existed 
for  admitting  them,  exists  now  for  retaining 
them.  I  say  general  i^eason^  because  we  are 
engaged  with  general  principles  of  ecclesias- 
tical organization^  and  not  in  pursuit  of  spe- 
cial rules  of  ecclesiastical  discipline. 

Thus  far  in  the  view  taken  of  the  visible 
church,  the  initiated  are  considered  as  admit- 
ted to  privileges^  with  reference  to  their  own 
personal  advantages.  In  addition  to  this, 
they  are  to  be  considered  as  parts  of  an  or- 


OF   THE  VISIBLE    CHURCH.  13 

ganization,  designed  for  general  religious 
purposes,  to  luliich  the  unregenerate  may  he 
made  subservient,  loliile  the  saving  advanta- 
ges are  confined  to  the  regenerate. 

The  emblem  of  an  olive — a  fruit  tree,  em- 
ployed by  the  Apostle  in  Rom.  ii.,  is  beauti- 
fully illustrative  of  that  feature  of  the  church, 
to  which  the  readers's  attention  is  invited.  A 
tree,  besides  its  roots  and  trunk,  has  branches, 
buds,  leaves,  and  fruit.  It  grows,  and  extends 
itself,  by  the  springing  of  successive  branches 
from  those  already  in  existence,  just  as  the 
church  is  enlarged  by  the  multiplication  and 
growth  of  her  children,  those  infant  buds  of 
the  tree  of  the  Lord's  planting.  If  you  re- 
quire the  Baptists  to  apply  this  emblem  to 
the  illustration  of  their  idea  of  the  church, 
you  appear  to  be  little  short  of  unmerciful. 
Paul  certainly  never  intended  to  w^orry  Dr. 
Gill,  yet  he  has  been  the  occasion  of  his  wri- 
ting the  most  egregious  nonsense.  Let  any 
one  read  the  Doctor's  commentary  on  Rom. 
xi.  17,  and  if  he  can  make  out  a  tree,  it  is 
one,  the  fellow  of  which,  is  not  to  be  found 
in  all  the  vegetable  universe.  It  has  neither 
2 


14  OF  THE  VISIBLE    CHURCH. 

bud  nor  natural  branches,  stock  nor  roots — ' 
a  mere  congregation  of  scions.  It  admits  of 
branches  being  taken  from  it,  which  never 
belonged  to  it,  and  of  exotic  branches  being 
grafted  upon  it ;  but  to  w^hat  these  branches 
are  attached,  the  learned  Commentator,  with 
all  the  Rabbinical  doctors  of  Jerusalem  and 
Babylon  to  help  him,  has  not  been  able  to 
tell  us. 

Some  of  our  Pedo-Baptist  brethren,  al-^ 
though  they  do  not  make  quite  such  work 
as  this  with  the  'planting  of  the  Lord,  yet 
they  go  very  far,  in  the  process  to  which 
they  would  subject  the  church,  to  mar  it  in 
those  respects,  in  which  a  fruit-bearing  tree 
is  emblematic  of  its  nature.  As  soon  as 
a  branch  has  grown  to  a  size  to  bear  fruity 
if  it  yield  none,  it  must  either  be  cut  off  en* 
tirely,  or  so  far  dismembered  as  to  lose  all 
share  "  of  the  root  and  fatness  of  the  olive.'* 
At  all  events,  the  huds  are  all  to  be  torn  off, 
and  there  is  death  to  the  whole  branch. 
They  would  have  none  but  fruit-bearing 
branches,  with  very  little  buds  on  them  ;  and 
these  are  to  be  watched  very  closely.     If  they 


OF  THE  VISIBLE    CHURCH.  15 

give  indications  of  producing  nothing  but 
leaves,  they  are  at  once  to  be  broken  off.  A 
natural  tree  dealt  with  after  this  manner, 
w^ould  be  likely  to  resemble  one  that  had  been 
standing  in  the  neighbom'hood  of  the  house 
of  Job's  eldest  son,  in  the  day  when  it  w^as 
smitten  on  the  four  corners  thereof,  "by  a 
great  wind  from  the  wilderness." 

A  fruit  tree  is  not  a  mass  of  fruit,  but  an 
apparatus  for  the  production  of  fruit.  All  its 
branches  are  not  productive  ;  some  not  at 
first,  some  never.  But  they  belong  to  the 
tree,  and  have  their  place  in  the  general  eco- 
nomy. Each  branch,  each  leaf,  while  it  is 
sustained  by  the  tree^  contributes  to  its  health, 
and  vigour,  and  fruitfulness.  The  processes 
of  natiu-e  in  the  case,  are  too  well  understood 
to  need  proof  or  explanation.  From  year  to 
year,  fruit  is  produced  and  gathered.  The 
leaves  having  performed  the  part  assigned  to 
them  in  the  general  economy,  are  first  nip- 
ped by  the  frost,  and  then  driven  away  by 
the  blasts  of  autumn,  to  be  seen  no  more. 

I  am  aware  that  by  the  help  of  a  httle  ima- 
gination, resemblances  may  be  carried  to  an 


16  OF  THE   VISIBLE   CHURCH. 

extreme,  that  detracts  from  the  beauty  of 
simihtude,  and  from  the  dignity  of  language. 
But  we  are  in  Httle  danger  here ;  for  the  things 
themselves  in  the  church,  of  which  the  proper- 
ties of  the  tree  just  spoken  of  are  emblematic, 
are  so  obvious  that,  Avithout  the  help  of  the 
emblem,  they  could  not  fail  to  attract  our  at- 
tention. Not  only  is  the  visible  church  per- 
petuated and  extended  by  a  succession  of  in- 
dividuals, proceeding  one  from  another,  after 
the  manner  of  the  successive  branches  of  a 
tree,  but  it  is  an  apparatus  for  the  production 
of  piety,  as  the  other  is  for  the  production  of 
fruit.  The  maintainance  of  the  public  ordi- 
nances of  religion  will  hardly  be  denied  to  be 
essential  to  the  interests  of  personal  piety. 
Without  such  ordinances  believers  themselves 
lose  their  vigour,  and  become  unfruitful.  Ac- 
commodations for  worshipping  assemblies, 
and  for  the  support  of  the  ministry,  are  not 
to  be  dispensed  with,  if  religion  is  to  prosper 
in  the  world. 

From  the  nature  of  the  case,  as  well  as  from 
the  fact,  that  infants  are  received  into  the 
church,  in  a  way  to  ensure  her  perpetuity, 


OF  THE  VISIBLE   CHURCH.  17 

and  to  promote  her  enlargement,  in  a  degree 
commensm-ate  with  the  increased  demand  for 
the  pubhc  offices  of  rehgion,  it  is  perfectly 
natural  to  infer,  that  such  an  organization  was 
originally  designed,  as  would  secure  the  pro- 
vision necessary  for  their  maintainance.  The 
fact  is  certain,  that  the  pious  alone  have  sel- 
-dom  been  able  to  sustain  those  means,  which 
are  essential  to  their  own  spiritual  welfare. 
They  have  ever  been  more  or  less  dependent 
for  them  upon  others,  less  favoured  by  the 
grace  of  God  than  themselves.  Let  those 
who  will  subject  them,  by  their  idea  of  the 
church,  to  the  taunt  of  "  Corban,^^  from  those 
who  build  their  churches,  and  support  their 
;ininisters ;  for  one,  I  must  believe,  that  so  far 
as  the  circumcised  or  baptized  have  lent  their 
aid  to  these  objects,  they  have  only  contribut- 
ed tow^ards  carrying  out  an  important  end  con- 
templated in  the  organization  of  the  visible 
<)hurch.  The  many  ten  thousands  of  Israel 
Tvere  necessary  to  support  the  institutions  of 
Moses  in  safety  and  efficiency.  The  temple 
with  its  magnificence,  the  altar  with  its  vic- 
tims, and  the  priesthood  with  its  dependen- 
2* 


18  OF  THE  VISIBLE    CHURCH. 

cies,  could  not  have  been  sustained  (miracles 
apart)  w^ithout  the  strength  of  the  nation.  And 
vi^hat  Mrould  become  of  a  vast  majority  of  our 
churches  now,  if  those  who  have  only  been 
baptized  were  to  withhold  from  them  their 
support  ?  It  would  be  like  tearing  from  the 
fruit  tree  every  limb  that  was  not  productive, 
and  the  effect  would  be  the  same  in  the  sad- 
ness of  its  character.  The  tree  would  lose 
large  supplies  of  nourishment  from  the  sur- 
rounding atmosphere,  by  which  its  vigour  and 
fruitfulness  had  been  promoted,  and  the  means 
of  grace  would  cease  to  be  maintained  in  the 
churches — the  organizations  themselves  would 
pass  out  of  existence. 

If,  instead  of  confounding  the  churches  vis- 
ible and  invisible,  a  just  regard  were  paid  to 
the  subserviency  of  the  one  to  the  other,  we 
should  be  far  from  turning  out  men  from  the 
one  because  they  did  not  belong  to  the  other ; 
or  from  saying  to  them,  you  have  no  business 
here  ;  when  without  their  aid,  we  should  have 
neither  minister  nor  sanctuary.  When  God 
gave  them  privileges,  he  laid  them  under  obli- 
gations— obligations  for  their  own  sake,tobe- 


OF  THE    VISIBLE    CHURCH.  19 

lieve  in  Jesus,  and  thus  become  united  with 
the  invisible  church ;  obhgations  for  the  sake 
of  others,  to  sustain  the  institutions  of  rehgion 
for  the  saving  benefit  of  the  elect;  among 
whom  would  be  many  of  their  own  children, 
if  not  themselves. 

The  church  is  a  good  olive  tree.  The 
branches  that  bear  not  fruit,  the  Husbandman 
will  attend  to  in  due  time,  as  he  will  to  the 
tares  of  the  field. 

Should  any  find  this  last  observation  pro- 
ducing disagreeable  symptoms  in  their  minds, 
they  are  affectionately  entreated  not  to  suffer 
themselves  to  be  overcome.  It  may  prevent 
impleasant  consequences,  to  revert  to  an  ob- 
servation already  made,  that  "we  are  engaged 
with  general  principles  of  ecclesiastical  orga- 
nizatiorij  and  not  in  pursuit  of  special  rules  of 
ecclesiastical  disciplmey 


CHAPTER  11. 

OF  THE   NATURE   OF  THE    INITIATORY  RITE. 

The  initiatory  rite  under  the  old  dispensa- 
tion, is  called  a  sign,  or  token,  and  a  seal. 
Paul  (in  Rom.  iv.)  says  that  Abraham  "re- 
ceived the  sign  of  circmncision,  a  seal  of  the 
righteousness  of  faith,  which  he  had,  being  yet 
uncircumcised."  Pedo-Baptists  have  little 
need  to  be  affected  by  the  attempts  that  have 
been  made  to  establish  a  distinction  betw^een 
the  significancy  of  the  ordinance  as  applied  to 
Abraham,  and  as  it  was  applied  to  his  seed. 
By  referring  to  the  original  transaction,  it  w^ll 
be  seen  that  the  ordinance  was  administered 
to  the  father  and  the  children,  upon  the  same 
principle.  "  I  will  be  a  God  to  thee  ;"  there- 
fore be  circumcised.  ''  I  will  be  a  God  to  thy 
seed ;"  therefore  let  them  be  circumcised.  If 
the  ordinance  was  a  seal  of  the  righteousness 
of  faith  to  Abraham,  it  was  the  same  to  his 
children.  The  second  part  of  the  apostle's 
language  is  exegetical  of  the  first,  as  if  he  had 


THE  INITIATORY  RITE.  21 

said,  "  the  sign  of  circumcision,  ivhich  was  a 
seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith."  This  gives 
the  most  natural  sense  to  the  language,  and 
avoids  the  incongi'uity  of  representmg  a  stand- 
ing ordinance  of  the  church,  as  one  thing  at 
one  time,  and  another  thing  at  another  time. 

The  righteousness  of  faith,  is  the  great  dis- 
tinguishing benefit  of  the  covenant  of  grace, 
as  opposed  to  the  righteousness  of  the  law, 
under  the  covenant  of  works ;  and  the  ap- 
pointment of  an  ordinance,  which  signified 
and  sealed  it  to  the  heirs  of  promise,  was  a 
glorious  attestation  to  the  doctrine  of  salvation 
by  grace.  As  a  great  distinguishing  benefit 
too,  with  which  the  other  saving  benefits  of 
the  covenants  are  inseparably  connected,  it 
very  naturally,  and  in  strict  conformity  with 
Scripture  usage,  represents  them  all.  Or,  as  a 
learned  professor  of  the  present  day  expresses 
it,  "  the  various  grace  of  the  covenant.''^ 

Cruden,  in  explaining  the  term  sign,  says, 
"  circumcision  was  a  sign,  evidence,  or  assu- 
rance, both  of  the  blessings  promised  by  God, 
and  of  man's  obligations  to  the  duties  re- 
quired."    Under  the    article    seal-  he  says, 


22  OF  THE  NATURE  OF 

"circumcision  was  a  seal,  and  an  assurance 
on  God's  part  to  Abraham  and  his  spiritual 
seed,  that  he  would  give  them  Christ  the 
promised  seed  out  of  the  loins  of  Abraham ; 
and  in  him  accept  of  them  as  his  peculiar  peo- 
ple, pardon  their  sins,  and  cleanse  them  from 
their  natural  corruption.  It  was  a  confirma- 
tion of  the  covenant  of  grace,  and  of  the 
righteousness  therein  promised,  upon  believ- 
ing in  Christ."  These  quotations  are  made 
for  two  reasons  :  First,  because  they  express 
the  truly  spiritual  signification  of  circumcision; 
and  secondly,  because  they  give  the  proper 
extension  to  the  blessing  included  in  the 
righteousness  of  faith.  Baptism  cannot  have 
a  more  spiritual  meaning,  nor  can  any  claim 
for  it  a  meaning  more  extensive.  The  "wash- 
ing aw^ay  of  sins,"  of  which  it  is  the  immedi- 
ate sign  and  seal,  is  to  be  received  in  the  ordi- 
nance in  its  connection  with  the  other  bene- 
fits of  the  covenant,  in  the  same  manner  as 
the  righteousness  of  faith  is  received  in  cir- 
cumcision. In  point  of  fact,  the  two  sacra- 
ments have  precisely  the  same  signification. 
Cnxumcision  and  baptism,  as  ordinances  of 


THE    INITIATORY    RITE.  23 

the  visible  church,  (and  so  also  the  others,)  are 
seals  in  a  more  qualified  sense,  than  that  in 
which  the  term  is  applied  to  the  act  of  the 
Spirit;  m  his  sealing  work.  The  sealing  of 
the  Spirit  always  implies  the  personal  grace 
of  the  subject.  The  divine  agent  often  makes 
his  impression,  in  the  absence  of  the  visible 
ordinance.  And  none  who  will  be  likely  to 
take  an  interest  in  this  discussion,  will  contend 
that  gracious  exercises  have  always  attended 
the  administration  of  the  initiatory  rite,  either 
under  the  present  or  the  former  dispensation. 
The  blessing  of  the  righteousness  of  faith, 
Abraham  had  long  possessed  ;  and  it  had  long 
been  sealed  to  him  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  But 
though  he  had  the  thing  symbolized  by  cir- 
cumcision, he  received  the  ordinance  itself  in 
his  new  relation  ;  and  as  has  already  been  ob- 
served, it  was  administered  to  /izm,  upon  the 
same  principle  as  it  was  to  his  seed,  who  had 
not  been  sealed  by  the  Holy  Spirit  of  promise 
unto  the  day  of  redemption.  To  Abraham 
and  to  his  seed,  circumcision  was  mi  attestation, 
an  evidence,  or  assurance,  as  Cruden  expresses 
it,  of  the  blessings  promised  by  God  in  the 


24  OF  THE  NATURE  OP 

covenant  of  grace  ;  and  of  the  connection  be- 
tween the  actual  possession  of  those  blessings, 
and  the  exercise  of  faith.  In  this  sense  alone, 
can  any  external  ordinance  be  properly  regard- 
ed as  a  seal.  When  so  considered,  its  charac- 
ter is  not  affected  by  the  personal  qualities  of 
the  subject  to  whom  it  is  applied.  A  believer 
w411  make  use  of  it,  and  w^ill  appropriate  to 
himself  the  assurance  of  the  grace  of  w^hich  it 
is  the  sign  and  the  seal.  But  this  does  not 
alter  the  nature  of  the  thing  itself,  or  make  it 
more  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith,  than 
it  was  before,  or  than  it  is  to  those  whose 
want  of  faith  incapacitates  them  for  making  a 
similar  use  of  it. 

Although  the  sprinkling  of  blood  was  not  a 
sacrament,  nor  called  a  seal,  yet  as  an  attesta- 
tion to  a  gracious  truth,  it  possesses  analogies 
sufficiently  strikino-  to  afford  an  illustration  of 

J  o 

the  general  nature  of  a  sacrament.  When 
God  commanded  blood  to  be  sprinkled  upon 
the  people,  and  upon  the  altar,  and  upon  the 
furniture  of  the  tabernacle,  and  upon  almost 
everything  pertaining  to  the  Israelites  and 
their  worship,  he  gave  an   attestation  to  the 


THE  INITIATORY   RITE.  25 

doctrine,  not  only  that  "without  shedding  of 
blood  there  was  no  remission,"  but  also  that 
in  "  the  blood  of  sprinkling  "  there  was  remis- 
sion of  sins.  As  this  application  of  blood, 
whether  made  to  a  man  believing,  or  to  a  child 
incapable  of  believing,  or  to  the  insensate 
stones  of  the  altar,  or  furniture  of  the  taber- 
nacle, was  equally  significant  of  the  same  so- 
lemn truth ;  and  afforded  an  equally  strong  at- 
testation of  it,  in  every  instance  in  which  the 
application  was  made,  so  the  sacraments  do 
not  lose  their  significancy  nor  sacredness,  by 
the  character  of  the  subjects  to  whom  they 
are  applied.  From  their  very  nature  they  can- 
not. They  consist  of  two  things,  connected 
not  by  mere  resemblances,  but  by  the  authori- 
ty and  appointment  of  God.  The  outward 
act  or  ceremony,  which  may  be  called  the  ma- 
terial; and  the  spiritual  grace,  doctrine,  or 
truth  designed  to  be  attested,  which  may  be 
called  the  engraving  upon  the  material,  and 
is  consequently  always  present,  definite, 
uniform,  and  unchangeable. 

The  importance  of  carefully  considering 
this  part  of  the  subject,  is  enhanced  by  the 


26  OF  THE  NATURE  OF 

prevailing  want  of  care  to  confine  the  office 
of  baptism,  as  administered  by  men,  to  the 
ends  for  which  it  was  instituted.  Composed 
as  the  visible  church  is,  of  materials  introduced 
for  the  most  part  at  an  age  when  there  can  be 
no  understanding  of  spiritual  things,  it  should 
be  borne  in  mind  that  in  the  administration  of 
the  initiatory  rite,  men  push  their  views  so  far 
as  to  interfere  with  what  does  not  belong  to 
them,  whenever  they  insist  upon  such  connec- 
tions between  the  rite  and  personal  grace,  as 
God  has  not  established.  The  sealing  of  the 
soul  is  an  inivard  action  of  the  Spirit,  and  be- 
longs to  the  invisible  kingdom.  Sealing  the 
grace  or  truth  of  the  covenant  to  an  individual 
by  baptism,  is  an  outward  action^  and  belongs 
to  the  visible  kingdom.  Each  of  these  actions 
has  its  appropriate  place,  and  is  assigned  to  its 
appropriate  administration.  Ordinances  be- 
long to  the  visible  church,  and  they  are  limited 
in  that  respect  to  the  ends  of  a  visible  organi- 
zation. They  seal  the  grace  or  truth  which 
God  promises,  and  which  the  church  receives 
by  faith.  When  any  thing  beyond  this  is  as- 
cribed to  them,   they  are  taken  out  of  their 


THE  INITIATORY  RITE.  27 

place,  and  are  thrust  into  a  province  over 
which  God  has  reserved  the  administration  to 
himself. 

If  the  views  which  have  been  given  of  the  na- 
ture of  the  initiatory  rite  be  conformable  to  the 
truth,  then  it  is  manifestly  improper  to  represent 
the  faith  of  the  parent  as  being  sealed  to  the 
child  in  baptism.  Such  a  represention  involves 
not  only  inaccuracy  of  language,  but  an  error  in 
point  of  fact ;  and  the  unavoidable  inference  to 
be  deduced  from  it  is,  that  baptism,  instead  of 
being  a  seal  of  definite,  fixed,  and  unalterable 
signification,  may  prove  to  be  any  thing,  and 
every  thing,  that  the  endless  diversities  of  hu- 
man imaginings  can  make  it. 

Neither  is  it  correct  to  say  that  the  faith  of 
the  church  is  sealed  in  the  ordinance  to  the 
child.  This  is  a  popular  mode  of  speaking 
on  the  subject,  even  with  some  whose  views 
on  the  main  question  are  conceived  to  be  cor- 
rect. It  is  not  the  faith  of  the  church  that  is 
sealed,  but  the  grace  or  truth  of  the  covenant, 
which  the  church  is  supposed  to  receive  and 
rely  upon.  The  faith  of  the  church  itself 
may  be  marred  by  many  corruptions;  but 


28  OF   THE    NATURE    OF 

these  cannot  affect  the  true  signification  of  a 
divine  ordinance.  God's  righteousness,  which 
is  the  righteousness  of  faith,  shall  not  be 
abolished ;  and  his  salvation,  v^^hich  is  the  con- 
summation of  the  grace  of  the  covenant,  shall 
be  forever. 

The  views  that  have  been  given  expose  the 
inaccuracy  of  another  sentiment.  I  do  not 
know  that  the  idea  has  been  formally  adopt- 
ed by  any,  that  baptism  contains  an  attestation 
to  the  faith  of  an  adult  receiving  it,  or  to  that 
of  the  parent  of  a  child  receiving  it.  Yet, 
such  an  idea  appears  to  mingle  with  those 
conceptions  on  the  subject,  by  which  the 
practice  of  many  is  regulated.  The  righte- 
ousness of  faith  was  sealed  to  Abraham  ;  and 
that  he  was  a  believer  when  he  was  circum- 
cised we  know  very  well.  But  that  such  a 
fact  should  be  made  the  subject  of  a  sealing 
ordinance— a  holy  sacrament,  is  past  all  belief. 
The  subject  does  not  rise  to  the  dignity 
of  a  sacrament.  Any  man's  fidelity  is  too 
small  a  matter  to  admit  of  being  associated, 
even  in  idea,  with  the  truth  and  grace  of 
God  in  a  standing  ordinance  of  his  house. 


THE    INITIATORY    RITE.  29 

In  such  an  ordinance  God  testifies  for  liim- 
self,  and  not  for  man.  The  duties  which 
are  imposed  constitute  another  subject. 


CHAPTER  III. 

OF  THE  RELATION  OF  THE  BAPTIZED  TO  THE 
CHURCH. 

Are  those  who  have  been  baptized  in  their 
infancy  members  of  the  church?  The  con- 
stitution of  the  Reformed  Dutch  Church  says 
expressly  that  they  are  ;  and  that  they  are 
subject  to  her  government  and  disciphne. 
The  same  doctrine  is  interv^^oven  with  the 
whole  texture,  so  far  as  it  relates  to  the  sub- 
ject, of  the  platform,  agreed  upon  by  the  Pu- 
ritans of  New  England  at  the  Synod  of  Cam- 
bridge, Anno  Domini,  1649.  As  far  as  certain 
writers  are  understood,  however,  this  doctrine, 
so  consonant  to  every  rational  idea  of  the 
operation  of  an  initiatory  rite,  is  received  by 
some  in  a  very  qualified  sense.  Dr.  Ward- 
law  remarks  of  those  who  have  been  baptized 
in  their  infancy,  "  If  on  growing  up  they  do 
not  hold  the  truth  in  the  knowledge  of  which 
they  have  been  instructed,  and  on  the  princi- 
ples of  which  they  have  been  nurtured  and 
admonished,  they  must  be  treated  according- 


BAPTIZED    TO    THE    CHURCPI.  31 

Iv.  They  cannot  be  admitted  to  the  commu- 
nion of  the  church.  If  on  the  contrary  they 
abide  in  the  truth,  holding  fast  the  faithful 
word  as  they  have  been  taught,  then  they  are 
at  liberty  to  unite  in  fellowship  wherever  their 
judgment  and  conscience,  on  examination  of 
the  word  of  God,  may  direct  them.  I  do  not 
go  so  far  as  to  speak  of  their  being  separated 
from  the  church  at  any  particular  age,  by  a 
formal  sentence  of  exclusion  when  they  do 
not  give  evidence  of  the  reception  and  influ- 
ence of  the  gospel,  for  the  reason  just  assign- 
ed, that  their  baptism  has  not  constituted 
them  p)roperly  members  of  a  particular  socie- 
ty, hut  only  disciples  of  Christ,  under  train- 
ing for  the  duties  and  enjoyments  of  his 
kingdom. 

I  am  not  siue  that  I  understand  the  Rev. 
author  in  these  remarks.  It  would  seem  that 
baptism  constituted  a  kind  of  general  church 
membership,  a  membership  which  is  defec- 
tive, because  it  is  not  with  a  particular  so- 
ciety ;  and  which  is  not  such  as  to  warrant  a 
formal  sentence  of  exclusion.  The  baptized 
are  only  disciples  of  Christ,  under  training 
for  the  duties  and  enjoyments  of  his  kingdom. 


32  RELATION    OF    THE 

Can  any  one  tell  from  these  representations? 
whether  the  baptized,  with  the  seal  of  the 
covenant  upon  them,  are  in  covenant  or  not '? 
Is  it  so  much  smaller  a  thing  to  be  a  disciple 
of  Christ,  than  to  be  a  member  of  a  church, 
that  while  the  latter  subjects  to  discipline,  the 
former  does  not  ?  And  to  how  little  consi- 
deration is  baptism  entitled,  when  it  does  not 
admit  its  subject  far  enough  into  the  church, 
to  allow  of  his  being  thrust  out  of  it?  It 
would  afford  some  satisfaction  to  know, 
whence  the  doctor's  idea  of  discipleship  was 
derived.  Was  it  from  the  character  of  those 
against  whom  Saul  breathed  out  tlueatenings 
and  slaughter  1  Did  he  derive  it  from  those 
disciples,  full  of  faith  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
who  were  chosen  and  ordained  deacons,  on 
account  of  their  exalted  spiritual  qualifica- 
tions ?  Perhaps  the  seventy,  and  the  twelve 
also,  who  are  called  disciples,  as  they  were 
not  "  properly  members  of  a  particular  church, 
were  under  training  for  the  duties  and  enjoy- 
ments of  the  kingdom  of  Christ."  But  leav- 
ing particular  cases  out  of  the  question,  it  is 
somewhat  surprising,  that  these  should  have 


BAPTIZED  TO  THE    CHURCH.  33 

been  employed  to  express  something  less  than 
church  membership ;  a  term  which  is  the 
common  designation  of  the  members  of  the 
church.  But  a  thing  was  to  be  expressed 
which  had  no  existence  but  in  the  writer's 
imagination;  of  course  it  had  no  name  in 
the  Scriptures  ;  a  new  term  had  to  be  in- 
vented, or  an  old  one  employed  out  of  its 
usual  signification. 

The  highly  esteemed  Dr.  Cuyler,  speaking 
of  those  who  have  been  baptized  in  their  in- 
fancy, employs  the  following  language : — 
"  They  are  members  of  the  church,  as  born 
of  believing  parents  ;  and  baptism  is  a  sign 
and  seal  of  it.  But  they  are  infant  members, 
and  can  consequently  be  entitled  only  to  the 
privileges  of  infant  members."  The  next 
sentence  is  calculated  to  arrest  particular 
attention.  "  They  change  this  relation  for 
adult  membership,  only  by  a  credible  profes- 
sion, and  in  no  other  way."  There  must  be 
some  pretty  old  infants  in  the  church  accord- 
ing to  this  doctrine.  Many,  alas,  remain  per- 
petual babes.  One  would  think,  that  if  as 
infants  they  are  entitled  only  to  the  privileges 


34  RELATION    OF  THE 

of  infant  members,  they  would  also,  as  infants, 
be  held  free  from  all  those  responsibilities, 
which  are  binding  only  on  adults.  If  they 
must  be  infants,  why  should  not  their  infan- 
tine imbecility  be  recognized  in  every  aspect 
in  which  they  are  contemplated?  While 
infants  indeed^  they  could  have  neither  a 
good  nor  a  bad  standing  in  the  church ;  and 
as  their  relation  as  infants,  with  its  standing, 
such  as  it  is,  is  changed  for  adult  member- 
ship, only  by  a  credible  profession,  and  in  no 
other  way,  how  comes  it  to  pass,  that  those 
who  have  made  no  profession,  and  conse- 
quently have  not  changed  their  relations,  are 
represented  in  the  very  next  paragraph  by 
our  author,  as  in  had  standing?  There  are 
a  great  many  things,  which  a  great  many 
people  don't  understand.  Dr.  Wardlaw's  dis* 
cipleship  has  been  seen  to  be  one  of  them ; 
here  we  have  another.  The  manner  in  which 
our  distinguished  authors  write  of  the  rela- 
tions of  the  baptized  to  the  church,  proves 
that  when  a  thing  is  not,  it  is  hard  telling 
what  it  is ;  and  that  in  the  attempt  the  ablest 
men  appear  to  great  disadvantage. 


BAPTIZED    TO    THE    CHURCH.  35 

Another  thing  is  observeable  here.     Those 
who  are  generally  consistent,  are  yet  capable 
of    speaking   very   diiFerently   of  the  same 
thing,  from  what  they  had  spoken  of  it  be- 
fore, when  an  unvarying  course  would  lead 
to  some  undesirable  result.     The  switches  in 
the  rails  get  shifted,  and  the  more  rapid  the 
motion,  the  sooner  and  the  gi'eater  do   the 
effects  of  the   divergency  become  manifest. 
When  the  question  is,  shall  baptism  be  ad- 
ministered to  certain  children?  the  ordinance 
is  spoken  of  as  a  thing  so  sacred  and  holy, 
and  so  full  of  meaning,  that  a  caution  becomes 
necessary,  lest  it  should  be  considered  to  be 
the  washing  away  of  sin  itself.    But  when  the 
ordinance  is  once  administered,  and  the  ques- 
tion is,  to  what  does  it  amount  ?  then  it  pos- 
sesses scarcely  meaning  and  virtue  enough  to 
give  to  its  subject  a  local  habitation  and  a 
name,  even  in  a  house  where  there  are  vessels 
to  dishonour  as  well  as  to  honour. 

This  is  not  the  way  in  which  the  initiatory 
ordinance  is  spoken  of  in  the  Scriptures. 
God's  people  of  old  were  distinguished  pre- 
eminently by  their  interest  in  the  Abrahamic 
covenant.     Whatever  special  privileges  they 


36  RELATION  OF   THE 

enjoyed,  their  great  distinction  and  honour 
consisted  in  their  being  in  covenant  with  God  ; 
and  that  in  their  circumcision  they  had  re- 
ceived the  seal  of  the  covenant.  They  were 
as  much  organized,  as  much  in  covenant,  and 
as  much  members  of  the  church,  before  the 
institution  of  the  passover  as  after  it.  They 
were  distinguished  not  as  Passoverans^  but 
as  "the  Circumcision."  And  if  baptism  be 
come  in  the  place  of  circumcision,  if  it  entitle 
to  as  high  and  sacred  privileges  as  were 
secured  by  the  former,  it  will  be  difficult  to 
discover  the  true  idea  of  baptism  in  the  lan- 
guage under  review,  or  the  true  nature  of  the 
relation  of  the  baptized  to  the  church. 

If  we  are  to  form  our  idea  of  the  Christian 
church  as  to  its  constituent  parts,  from  the 
order  given  to  the  Apostles,  baptism  is  as 
much  the  badge  and  test  of  church  member- 
ship, as  circumcision  was  of  old.  "  Go  ye 
teach  or  disciple  all  nations,  baptizing 
them^  The  Lord's  Supper  enters  no  more 
into  the  constitution  of  church  membership 
now,  than  the  passover  did  in  the  beginning. 
The  baptism  of  an  adult  makes  him  a  mem- 


BAPTIZED    TO    THE    CHURCH.  37 

ber  of  the  church  most  assuredly,  or  the  ini- 
tiatory act  does  not  initiate  him.  But  as  we 
have  but  one  baptism^  even  as  we  have  but 
one  God  and  Father,  so  the  baptism  of  an 
infant  goes  just  as  far,  and  makes  it  as  much 
a  member,  as  the  other.  To  commune  is 
the  duty  of  those  w^ho  are  members^  and  con- 
fession is  a  suitable  means  to  satisfy  the  offi- 
cers of  the  church  that  the  duty  is  about  to 
be  performed,  and  the  privilege  about  to  be 
enjoyed,  with  understanding  and  acceptance. 
The  idea  of  a  discipleship  that  does  not 
amount  to  membership,  and  the  idea  of  an 
infant  membership,  that  may  last  to  the  end 
of  the  longest  life,  are  as  derogatory  to  the 
true  dignity  of  baptism,  as  they  are  fanciful 
in  themselves.  A  person  belongs  to  the 
church,  or  he  does  not.  He  is  in  visible 
covenant  with  God,  or  he  is  not.  If  he  be 
not  in  covenant  after  he  has  been  baptized, 
no  matter  at  what  period  of  his  life,  it  can 
only  be  because  his  baptism  signified  and 
sealed  nothing  to  him.  But  Holy  Baptism 
does  signify  and  seal  the  grace  of  that  cove- 
nant which  gives  to  the  church  her  existence, 


38  RELATION,   ETCr 

and  which  estabhshes  the  relation  of  the  sev 
eral  parts  to  the  whole  body.  It  is  true  of 
all  that  have  had  the  seal  of  the  covenant  put 
upon  them,  that  "  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of 
Heaven.'^ 


CHAPTER  IV. 

OF     THE     GROUND   UPON    WHICH    THE    INITIA- 
TORY RITE   IS  TO  BE   ADMINISTERED  TO 
INFANTS. 

The  thing  sealed  in  an  ordinance,  and  the 
ground  or  warrant  for  applying  the  seal  of  that 
thing,  are  distinct  subjects.     In  the  case  of 
adults,  the  right  to  the   ordinance,  and  the 
administrator's  warrant  to  dispense  it,  are  also 
distinct.     The  right  is   in  the  faith  of  the 
subject.     "  If  thou  believest  with  all  thine 
heart,  thou  mayest."     But  until  the  eunuch 
made  confession  of  his  faith,  Philip  had  no 
warrant  to  baptize  him.     So  also  the  war- 
rant may  exist  for  administering  the  ordinance, 
when  the  subject  offering  himself  has  no  right 
to  receive  it.     Peter  undoubtedly  acted  upon 
a  sufficient  warrant  when  he  baptized  Simon, 
because  the   sorcerer   professed  to   believe. 
Yet  though  the  warrant  was  there,  the  right 
to  the  ordinance  did  not  exists  Simon  was  not 
■a  behever. 


40  THE   INITIATORY  RITE 

In  the  case  of  infants,  who  are  never  bap- 
tized on  account  of  the  spiritual  quahties 
which  they  are  supposed  to  possess,  no  dif- 
ference between  their  right  and  the  adminis- 
trator''s  warrant  can  exist,  if  the  covenant 
relation  of  the  parent  be  admitted  to  be  the 
ground  of  the  infant's  title  to  be  received 
into  the  church,  or  rather  to  have  its  mem- 
bership acknowledged  by  its  baptism.  On 
this  principle  the  right  is  knowable  in  itself, 
and  not  the  subject  of  uncertain  inference, 
like  the  faith  of  an  adult  from  his  profession. 

That  the  church-membership,  or  baptism 
of  the  parent  is  essential,  and  contributes 
largely  to  the  infant's  right,  will  hardly  be 
denied  by  a  Pedo-Baptist.  The  important 
question  is.  whether  the  church-membership 
of  the  parent  does  not  itself  constitute  the 
ground  of  the  child's  church- membership, 
and  consequent  right  to  baptism?  The  affir- 
mative side  of  this  question  presents  the 
subject  in  its  simplest  form  ;  and  the  adop- 
tion of  it  relieves  from  the  endless  embar- 
rassments which  must  attend  the  practice  of 
those   who,  while  they  are  administering  a 


ADMINISTERED    TO    INFANTS.  41 

sacred  ordinance,  are  in  doubt  whether  tlie 
subject  be  entitled  to  it  or  not.  This  observa- 
tion is  particularly  applicable  to  the  practice 
of  those  Avho  do  not  insist  upon  the  full  com- 
munion of  the  parent,  as  a  test  of  the  eccle- 
siastical rights  of  the  child.  The  system 
which  requires  such  a  test,  inconsistent  as 
I  beheve  it  to  be,  and  as  I  hope  to  show  it 
to  be,  w^th  the  constitution  of  God's  covenant, 
has  at  least  some  consistency  with  itself.  It 
admits  of  a  rule,  and  the  decisions  upon  that 
rule  are  conformable  to  the  professed  belief 
of  those  who  are  concerned.  But  to  make 
Christian  character  the  ground  of  right,  and 
then  to  be  compelled  to  infer  that  character 
against  the  convictions  of  those  to  whom  it 
is  supposed  to  belong,  and  against  their  refu- 
sal to  obey  the  dying  command  of  the  Mas- 
ter, either  because  they  do  not  consider  them- 
selves entitled  to  the  privileges  of  believers, 
or  for  any  other  reason,  exhibits  charity  run 
mad,  and  so  expounding  the  law  from  the 
place  of  judgment,  as  to  make  private  opinion, 
entertained  ao;ainst  both  the  confession  and 
4* 


42  THE    INITIATORY   RITE 

evidence,  the  rule  for  the  pubhc  administra- 
tion of  the  house  of  God- 
According  to  the  covenant  to  which  all 
appeal  for  the  confirmation  of  infant  privileges 
in  the  church,  relation,  and  not  state-,  desig- 
nated the  individuals  upon  whom  the  seal 
was  to  be  placed.  Neither  the  spiritual  state 
of  the  child,  nor  of  the  parent,  was  appealed 
to  for  the  decision  of  the  question,  whether 
the  right  existed  to  a  place  within  the  inclo- 
sure,  and  to  the  advantages  of  the  means  of 
grace.  It  was  a  question  of  privilege,  the 
law  of  which  was  settled  by  the  highest  au- 
thority, and  as  definitely  as  the  law  of  de- 
scent. Was  he  of  the  seed  of  Abraham  in 
the  line  of  Isaac  and  Jacob,  then  the  promise 
was  directly  to  him.  God  was  his  God,  and 
the  seal  of  the  covenant  must  be  passed  upon 
him.  What  has  charity  to  do  here  ?  Not  a 
whit  more  than  censoriousness  itself. 

How  far  the  relation  of  the  children  to 
Abraham  operated  as  a  reason  in  the  Divine 
mind,  for  designating  t^iem^  rather  than  oth- 
ers;  or  whether  it  operated  as  a  reascn  at 
all,  belongs  not  to  us ;  nor  is  it  of  conse- 


ADxMINISTERED    TO    INFANTS.  43 

quence  to  the  present  argument.  The 
ground,  or  authority  for  applying  the  seal  to 
any  others,  had  others  been  designated,  would 
have  been  the  same  that  it  is  now,  namely, 
the  divine  command.  This  is  definite  and 
imperative,  in  every  case  where  the  desig- 
nated relation  exists.  '•  Every  man  child 
shall  he  circumcised.''^ 

In  Mather's  Magnalia  (vol.  II.  p.  250,) 
the  sentiments  of  the  New  England  church, 
in  her  piu-est  days  for  faith  and  practice,  are 
thus  expressed :  "  Interest  in  the  covenant  is 
the  main  ground  of  title  to  baptism;  for  as 
in  the  Old  Testament,  this  was  the  ground  of 
title  to  circumcision.  Gen.  xvii.  7.  9,  10,  11, 
to  w^hich  baptism  now  answers,  Col.  ii.  11, 
12;  Acts  ii.  38,  39,  they  are  on  this  gi'ound 
exhorted  to  be  baptized^  because  the  promise 
or  covenant  was  to  thetji  and  to  their  children. 
That  a  member,  or  one  in  covenant,  as  such, 
is  the  subject  of  baptism,  was  further  cleared 
before,  propos.  1.  2.  That  these  children 
have  interest  iii  the  covenant  appears ;  be- 
cause if  the  parent  be  in  covenant,  the  child 
is  also ;  for  the  covenant  is  to  parents,  and 


44  THE    INITIATORY   RITE 

their  seed  in  their  generations^  Gen.  xvii.  7. 
9 ;  the  pi'omise  is  to  you  and  to  your  children^ 
Acts  ii.  39.  If  the  parent  stand  in  the  church, 
so  doth  the  child,  among  the  Gentiles  now, 
as  well  as  amoncr  the  Jews  of  old.  Rom.  xi. 
15.  20,  21,  22.  It  is  unheard  of  in  the 
Scriptures,  that  the  progress  of  the  covenant 
stops,  at  the  infant  child." 

In  conformity  with  these  views,  the  chm'ch 
insisted  upon  the  baptism  of  those  children 
whose  parents  were  not  communicants,  and 
were  not  "  fit  for_the  Lord's  Supper."  On 
the  following  page  this  language  is  employed : 
*'  Confederate  visible  believers,  though  but 
in  the  lowest  degree  such,  are  to  have  their 
children  baptized-"  And  again:  ''Yet  it 
does  not  necessarily  follow  that  these  persons 
are  immediately  fit  for  the  Lord's  Supper, 
because,  though  they  are,  in  a  latitude  of 
expression^  to  be  accounted  visible  believers, 
or  in  numero  fidelium^  as  even  infants  in 
covenant  are,  yet  they  may  w^ant  that  ability 
to  examine  themselves,  and  that  spiritual  ex- 
ercise of  faith,  which  is  requisite  to  that  or- 
dinance." 


ADMINISTERED    TO    INFANTS.  45 

In  these  passages,  relation,  without  regard 
to  the  faith  or  confession  of  the  parent  in 
covenant,  is  clearly  stated,  and  maintained 
as  the  ground  of  the  infant's  right  to  baptism. 
A  child  born  of  a  parent  in  covenant,  whether 
that  parent  be  a  believer  in  the  evangelical 
sense  of  the  term  or  not,  is  a  child  of  the 
church,  a  child  of  Abraham,  to  whose  seed 
the  promise  was  made ;  and  is  consequently 
entitled  to  the  seal  of  the  covenant.  With 
regard  to  any  immediate  parent,  it  is  more 
proper  to  say  that  the  child  derives  his  right 
through  him,  than  from  him.  The  Hebrews 
were  an  aggregation — a  mass — collectively 
the  seed  of  Abraham ;  and  the  relation  of 
each  individual  to  him,  was  that  of  a  part 
of  the  common  mass,  which  was  his  in  its 
aggregation.  If  the  wicked  Manasseh  de- 
rived his  right  to  circumcision  from  his  father 
the  worthy  Hezekiah,  from  whom  did  the 
good  Josiah.  the  son  of  the  unworthy  Am- 
nion, derive  his  right?  It  would  perhaps  be 
unfair,  to  assume  that  the  circumcision  of 
Josiah  was  as  canonical  as  that  of  Manasseh, 
though  I  doubt  whether  many  would  be  wil- 


46  THE   INITIATORY   RITE. 

ling  to  deny  it.  But  this  is  not  material.  If 
it  can  be  established  that  each  individual  of 
the  Jewish  family  is  to  be  regarded  in  the 
matter  of  the  covenant,  as  the  immediate  child 
of  Abraham,  and  that  his  right  to  the  seal  is 
designated  by  that  relation,  small  concern 
need  be  felt  about  Josiah's  right  to  the  initia- 
tory ordinance,  or  the  rights  of  thousands, 
who  are  ignominiously  cast  out  of  the  con- 
gregation of  the  Lord. 


CHAPTER  V. 

ARGUMENTS  TO  PROVE  THAT  THE  COVENANT 
RELATION  OF  THE  PARENT  IS  THE  SOLE 
GROUND  OF  THE  CHILd's  RIGHT  TO  THE 
INITIATORY    ORDINANCE. 

As  the  point  under  consideration  is  the  one 
upon  which  the  Avhole  subject  must  turn,  so 
far  as  it  is  to  be  decided  by  the  tenor  of  the 
Abrahamic  covenant,  the  remarks  upon  it  will 
be  somewhat  extended.  This  chapter  will 
consequently  be  pretty  long.  For  the  con- 
venience of  the  reader,  it  shall  be  divided  into 
sections,  answerable  to  the  several  arguments 
to  be  submitted. 

SECTION  I. 

The  rights  and  privileges  of  the  Jews,  as 
they  come  down  to  them  by  descent,  are  al- 
ways referred  to  Abraham^  without  any  re- 
gard to  intervening  parentage.  The  only 
exception  to  this  remark  is  in  favour  of  Isaac 
and  Jacob,   who  are  sometimes  mentioned. 


48  OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE. 

All  will  understand  the  reason  of  this,  in  the 
special  entailment  of  the  promise  upon  these 
two,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  son  of  the  bond- 
w^oman,  who  was  cast  out  by  authority  ;  and 
of  the  brother  of  Jacob,  of  whom  it  is  WTit- 
ten,  "  Esau  have  I  hated."  With  these  ex- 
ceptions, the  tenor  of  Scripture  is  uniform  in 
referring  the  peculiar  rights,  privileges,  and 
honours  of  each  member  of  the  Jewish  fami- 
ly, to  his  comiection  with  Abraham  himself. 
In  the  Jews  themselves,  Ave  may  regard  the 
claim  of  being  Abraham's  seed,  in  the  sense 
in  which  they  made  it,  as  an  empty  boast. 
So  it  was  in  reference  to  any  saving  advan- 
tages to  be  derived  from  it,  while  they  pos- 
sessed not  the  faith  of  their  father.  But  it  is 
not  the  less  true,  that  in  all  that  respected 
their  connection  with  the  visible  church,  and 
the  many  mercies  they  experienced  as  a  cove- 
nant people,  their  reference  to  Abraham  was 
just.  They  were  beloved  for  their  father's 
sake.  When  the  people  were  ready  to  perish 
in  the  wilderness,  "  God  remembered  his  holy 
promise,  and  Abraham  his  servant,  and  open- 
ed the  rock,  from  which  the  waters  ran  like  a 


OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE.  49 

river."  In  an  after  age,  when  they  were  in 
danger  of  being  swallowed  up  by  their  ene- 
mies, '•  God  was  gracious  to  them,  and  had 
compassion  on  them,  ....  because  of  his 
covenant  with  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob,  and 
would  not  destroy  them."  And  what  tender- 
ness does  not  Christ  infuse  into  his  justifica- 
tion of  himself  for  healing  a  woman  on  the 
Sabbath-day,  by  the  consideration,  that  she 
was  "  a  daughter  of  Abraham." 

Passages  could  be  adduced  to  almost  any 
extent,  to  evince  that  neither  nearness,  nor 
remoteness,  in  the  line  of  descent,  is  ever  re- 
garded as  affecting  the  relation  of  the  Jews 
to  Abraham  ;  or  their  claims  to  the  benefits 
Avhich  resulted  from  that  relation.  And  why 
should  not  the  principle  which  operated  upon 
the  mass,  be  allowed  to  operate  upon  the  par- 
ticular individuals  who  compose  the  mass? 
If  the  people  in  their  collective  capacity  were 
beloved  for  Abraham's  sake,  for  whose  sake 
w^ere  the  individuals  beloved  ?  Under  whose 
favour  was  Josiah  admitted  to  the  privileges 
of  the  covenant  of  his  fathers  ? 

But  leaving  this  train,  and  reverting  to  the 
5 


50  OP  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE. 

fact  that  God  repeatedly  delivered  the  Jews 
from  merited  destruction,  because  he  remem^ 
bered  his  holy  covenant  and  Abraham  his 
friend,  it  can  escape  the  observation  of  none, 
that  the  principle  upon  which  the  wicked  were 
spared  on  account  of  the  righteous  in  their 
case,  differs  essentially  from  that  which  is  in- 
volved in  other  instances  in  the  course  of  di- 
vine providence.  The  common  principle  i& 
expressed  in  the  case  of  Sodom.  God  will 
spare  the  wicked  for  the  sake  of  the  righteous 
that  are  among  them.  Not  so  with  the  Jews. 
For  although  there  were  among  them,  at  every 
period  of  their  impending  destruction,  righte- 
ous persons — fathers,  for  whose  sake,  if  for 
any,  judgment  might  be  averted  from  the 
children,  yet  it  is  never  said  that  the  wicked 
were  preserved  on  their  account,  but  always 
from  regard  to  Abraham,  and  the  covenant 
made  with  him.  The  inference  is,  that  nothing 
had  occurred  to  break  the  covenant  relation 
between  any  portion  of  the  seed,  and  the  com- 
mon head  and  parent  of  all ;  notAvithstanding 
their  remoteness  from  him  in  the  genealogi- 


OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE.  51 

cal  lincj  or  the  want  of  fidelity  in  many  of  the 
intervening  parents. 

SECTION  IL 

The  principle  that  the  covenant  relation 
between  Abraham  and  each  individual  of  his 
seed,  is  to  be  considered  as  immediate,  with- 
out regard  to  subordinate  parentage,  receives 
strong  confirmation  from  the  unquestionable 
prevalence  of  the  same  principle,  in  all  other 
covenants,  which  transmit  their  results  from 
father  to  son  by  natural  generation. 

Look  at  the  covenant  of  works  with  Adam. 
The  terrible  nature  of  that  which  is  entailed, 
does  not  alter  the  principle  upon  which  it  is 
transmitted.  What  that  principle  is,  none 
need  be  at  a  loss  to  know.  Not  an  individual 
even  of  the  present  day,  after  so  many  genera- 
tions from  the  common  father  of  the  race,  has 
had  his  covenant  relations  with  that  father 
modified  in  the  slightest  degree,  by  the  good 
or  bad  qualities  of  intervening  parents.  All 
are  begotten  in  Adam's  likeness,  as  much  as 
was  Seth  his  immediate  son.     It  is  only  as 


52  OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE. 

the  children  of  the^r^^  transgression,  that  any 
are  "  the  children  of  wrath."  "  By  one  man 
sin  entered."  "  By  the  offence  of  one,  judg- 
ment came  upon  all."  It  is  the  relation  to 
Adam  alone  that  produces  these  terrible  con- 
sequences. Imputation  of  guilt  is  direct  from 
him  to  us.  But  if  under  an  economy,  in 
which  justice  with  all  its  sternness  reigns, 
none  are  placed  in  a  worse  condition  by  the 
sins  of  their  immediate  parents,  is  it  to  be 
conceived  that  such  an  effect  was  intended  to 
be  produced,  by  the  operation  of  an  economy 
of  light  and  truth,  and  the  means  of  grace ; 
in  direct  repugnance  to  the  gracious  spirit  of 
its  conception,  and  the  gracious  ends  of  its 
establishment?  Shall  even  deeper  shadows 
than  those  of  the  ministration  of  death  be 
made  to  rest  upon  the  ministration  of  life  ? 
God  forbid. 

The  principle  contended  for  receives  a  sig- 
nal illustration  and  confirmation,  from  the 
covenant  of  royalty  with  David.  Manasseh's 
birth-right  to  the  throne  did  not  receive  its 
confirmation  from  the  virtues  of  his  father, 
Hezekiah  ;    nor  was  that  of  Josiah  impaired 


OF  THE  ns'ITIATORY  ORDINANCE.  53 

by  the  vices  of  his  father  Anion.     Each  was 
indebted  for  the  honour  to  which  he  was  rais- 
ed to  his  relation  to  David  the  head  of  the 
'Covenant.     Rehoboam  succeeded  his  father^ 
not  that  Solomon  might  have  a  successor,  but 
-"  that  David  might  always  have  a  light  be- 
fore God  in  Jerusalem."     And  although  Abi- 
jam  his  son  "walked  in  all  the  sins  of  his 
father,  nevertheless,  for  David's  sake,  did  the 
Lord  his  God  give  him  a  lamp  in  Jerusalem, 
to  set  up  his  son  after  him,  and  to  establish 
Jerusalem."     Comment  is  mmecessary  here. 
It  is  clear  as  the  sun  shining  in  his  strength^ 
■.that  no  regard  is  paid  to  intermediate  persons 
in  the  line  of  conveyance,  and  that  each  king 
succeeded  to  the  throne,  as  if  he  were  the 
first  from  David.     So  the  venerable  monarch 
himself  undoubtedly  understood  the  matter. 
In  view  of  the  unpromising  character  of  his 
•sons,  he  comforted  himself  with  this  reflec- 
•tion,  "  though  my  house  be  not  so  with  God, 
yet  hath  he  made  with  me  an   everlasting 
.covenant,  ordered  in  all  things  and  sure." 
In  estimating  the  regard  that  ought  to  be 

jpaid  to  tliis  covenant  in  its  bearing  upon  the 
5* 


54  OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE. 

principle  of  the  Abrahamic  covenant,  which 
is  noAV  under  consideration,  it  should  be  dis- 
tinctly borne  in  mind,  that  church-membership 
was  involved  in  the  right  to  reign — that  none 
but  a  member  of  the  church  could  sit  upon 
the  throne  in  Jerusalem.  What  then  if  con- 
current principles,  or  rather  wdiat  if  one  com- 
mon principle,  had  not  governed  the  rights  of 
the  same  individual  in  both  respects,  would 
have  been  the  consequence  ?  Clearly,  if  the 
operation  of  the  Abrahamic  covenant  would 
have  cut  off  from  the  church  that  unhappily 
large  portion  of  kings,  that  walked  not  in  the 
way  of  David  their  father,  the  tw^o  covenants 
must  have  conflicted  in  their  operation,  in  the 
most  fatal  manner.  By  the  one,  God  ivould 
have  these  men  itpon  the  throne.  By  the 
other,  he  would  not  have  them  in  the  church 
at  allj  much  less  upon  the  top  of  his  holy  hill 
of  Zion.  Is  it  in  two  systems  which  thus  dash 
against  each  other,  to  their  mutual  destruc- 
tion, that  we  see  the  products  of  his  wisdom, 
all  whose  works  reveal  the  exactest  unity  of 
design,  and  the  most  exquisite  harmony  of 
operation  ?    In  order  to  avoid  so  manifest  and 


OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE.  OO 

absurd  a  contradiction,  we  have  only  to  admit 
that  each  individual  of  the  Jewish  family,  was 
entitled  to  his  ecclesiastical  privileges,  as  a 
son  of  Abraham — as  a  part  of  the  common 
mass,  or  aggregation,  to  which  the  promise 
was  made — in  a  word,  as  the  child  of  the 
church. 

Aaron  stands  at  the  head  of  another  cove- 
nant, whose  privileges  and  honours  were  trans- 
mitted from  father  to  son  by  natural  descent. 
In  view  of  the  ends  contemplated  in  this  con- 
stitution, all  feel  that  the  priests'  hearts  should 
have  been  right  with  God,  and  that  the  most 
admirable  sanctity  of  life  became  their  high 
vocation.  They  should  have  been  perma- 
nently instructed,  and  holy.  "  Whose  lips 
should  keep  knoAvledge,"  if  not  the  priest's  ? 
*■  W^iose  hands  should  be  clean,"  if  not  theirs 
who  "  bear  the  vessels  of  the  Lord  ?  "  But 
Scripture  is  full  of  testimonies  against  multi- 
tudes of  their  order  ;  so  full  that  it  would  be 
disrespectful  to  the  reader  to  adduce  a  single 
passage  to  confirm  what  is  said.  But  who 
was  ever  kept  from  the  priesthood  on  account 
of  the  sins  of  his  father  ?     Hophni  and  Phi- 


56  OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE. 

neas  were  cut  off  for  their  own  shameless 
abominations  ;  and  the  house  of  Eh  became 
extnict.  But  while  a  son  of  Aaron  lived,  his 
title  was  unquestionable,  though  his  father 
was  as  vile  as  the  wretched  sons  of  Eli.  The 
question  of  title  was  to  be  settled  by  the 
genealogical  records,  and  by  nothing  else. 
When  the  Jews  had  returned  from  the  cap- 
tivity in  Babylon,  and  the  public  worship  of 
God  was  to  be  restored,  dependence  was 
placed  upon  those  records,  to  decide  who 
were  to  execute  the  priest's  office  in  the  se- 
cond temple,  and  not  upon  any  j)Ost-mo7'tem 
examination  into  the  religious  character  of 
those  who  had  departed  from  the  line  of  the 
visible  priesthood  on  earth,  to  glory  or  to 
shame  in  the  world  unseen.  Whatever  that 
character  in  any  instance  might  have  been,  it 
deprived  no  one  in  the  priestly  line  of  the  mi- 
tre and  the  ephod  ;  for  he  was  a  son  of  Aaron 
still.  Now  if  the  relation  to  Aaron  of  any  one 
in  the  priestly  line,  was  not  broken  by  the 
defective  character  of  any  intermediate  pa- 
rent, but  he  was  treated  as  if  he  had  been  the 
immediate  son  of  that  ''  saint  of  the  Lord^^'' 


OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE.  57 

shall  not  the  same  principle  apply  to  each  in- 
dividual of  the  seed  of  Abraham  ?  A  fortiori 
it  should  apply-  For  why  should  a  man  be 
excluded  from  the  outer  court,  for  that  which 
would  not  exclude  him  from  the  place  of  the 
ark  and  the  cherubim  —  from  the  holy  of 
holie  s? 

In  adducing  these  covenants,  and  in  stating 
the  facts  connected  with  them,  the  simple  pur- 
pose has  been  to  show,  that  in  representing 
the  covenant  connection  of  each  individual  of 
the  Jewish  family  to  be  direct  with  Abraham, 
without  reference  to  any  intervening  parent- 
age, and  that  his  right  to  the  seal  resulted 
from  that  relation,  nothing  has  been  advanced, 
which  is  not  in  strict  conformity  with  a  prin- 
ciple pervading  all  covenants,  which  transmit 
their  results  by  natural  descent.  With  what 
success  the  attempt  has  been  made,  is  sub- 
mitted to  the  judgment  of  the  reader. 

SECTION  III. 

For  another  argument  to  the  same  purpose, 
appeal  is  made  to  the  effect  which  the  oppo- 
site principle  would  have  upon  the  general 


58  OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE. 

design  of  the  covenant.  The  church  was  or- 
ganized, not  merely  for  the  benefit  of  those 
who  at  any  one  time  composed  its  members, 
but  also  for  the  extension  of  truth  and  privi- 
lege in  continuity,  through  successive  genera- 
tions. Now  if  the  principle  had  been  adopt- 
ed that  there  could  be  no  transmission,  save 
through  a  pious  parentage,  multitudes  would 
have  been  cut  off  for  whom  the  blessing  was 
intended,  and  who,  in  after  ages,  exhibited 
some  of  the  highest  examples  of  the  faith  and 
patience  of  the  saints — some  of  the  worthiest 
members  of  the  church  of  God.  Besides  the 
cases  suggested  by  names  that  have  already 
been  mentioned,  others  will  occur  to  the  mind 
of  every  reader.  It  is  to  be  presumed  that  it 
entered  into  the  design  of  the  covenant,  that 
the  rights  of  the  wicked,  who  were  honoured 
with  a  pious  parentage,  should  be  unquestion- 
able, and  that  no  alternative  remained  for  the 
righteous  descending  from  unworthy  parents, 
but  to  be  ignominiously  cast  out  of  the  con- 
gregation of  the  Lord?  If  we  regard  the 
covenant  in  the  largeness  and  benevolence  of 
its  design,   and  each  one  entitled  to  the  seal, 


OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE.  59 

as  being  designated  to  that  right  by  liis  im- 
mediate relation  to  Abraham,  we  shall  escape 
from  the  revolting  necessity  of  answering  this 
question  in  the  affirmative. 

A  covenant  which  contemplates  general  re- 
sults, extending  through  the  entire  range,  and 
onward  tlnrough  the  prolonged  existence  of  a 
nation  and  a  church,  and  which  conveys  its 
rights  and  privileges  through  the  channels  of 
natural  relations,  would  infallibly  defeat  the 
ends  of  its  own  creation,  if  it  allowed  the  de- 
fective character  of  those  w^ho  might  be  found 
in  the  line  of  conveyance  to  put  a  stop  to  the 
conveyance  itself.  On  this  principle,  the 
Jewish  church  would  have  become  extinct 
before  the  expiration  of  the  days  of  the  patri- 
archs. "  Grace  does  not  run  in  the  blood." 
It  is  but  reasonable,  in  contemplation  of  the 
design  of  a  church  organization,  that  we 
should  look  down,  as  well  as  up — -forward,  as 
well  as  backward,  from  some  Anion,  a  rusty 
link  in  the  chain  of  conveyance ;  forward  to 
the  good  Josiahs,  as  well  as  backward  to  the 
good  Hezekiahs,  that  may  be  found  in  the 
general  line.     In  many  of  the  chains  too,  the 


60  OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE. 

rusty  links  are  found  so  near  the  beginning, 
that  whole  generations  would  be  cut  off  by 
the  fault  of  one  individual^  far  less  worthy 
than  themselves.  This  would  be  visiting  the 
iniquities  of  the  fathers  upon  the  childi'en, 
not  only  to  the  third  and  fourth  generation, 
but  to  the  thousandth  ;  and  not  only  of  them 
that  hate  God,  but  of  them  also  that  love 
him. 

SECTION  IV. 

The  practical  commentary  on  the  Abra- 
hamic  covenant  furnished  by  the  history  of 
the  church,  is  entirely  conformable  to  the 
views  which  have  been  given.  Of  those 
who  were  born  in  Abraham's  house,  and  who 
were  brought  up  with  his  money,  and  who 
were  circumcised,  we  know  nothing  beyond 
the  fact,  that  they  received  the  ordinance. 
What  became  of  them  we  know  not,  and  any 
guess  that  may  be  made  respecting  them, 
can  be  of  no  consideration  in  an  argument 
upon  the  general  principles  of  the  covenant. 
We  know  more  of  Ishmael,  and  of  Esau  ; 
but  their  cases  are  so  disposed  of  as  to  place 


OP  THE  IXITIATORY  ORDINANCE.  61 

thcni  entirely  out  of  the  way  of  our  subject. 
With  the  exception  of  the  general  non-obser- 
vance of  the  ordinance  in  the  wilderness,  it 
is  presumed  there  can  be  no  dispute  as  to  the 
imiversality  of  the  practice.  The  command 
w^as  strictly  obeyed.  Every  man  child  was 
circumcised.  The  circumstances  of  "  the 
church  in  the  wilderness  "  were  peculiar.  All 
from  twenty  years  old  and  upwards,  of  those 
that  came  out  of  Egypt,  save  Caleb  and 
Joshua,  were  condemned  to  die  in  the  region 
of  their  wandering  and  rebellion.  The  peo- 
ple were  under  discipline.  "  God  had  sworn 
in  his  WTath  that  they  should  enter  into  his 
rest."  But  it  does  not  appear  that  even  this 
cut  off  their  children  from  their  interest  in 
the  covenant.  It  only  deferred  the  applica- 
tion of  the  seal ;  for  at  Gilgal,  Joshua  circum- 
cised all  who  were  born  in  the  wilderness. 
Of  this  number,  there  must  have  been  many 
of  all  ages  under  forty  years.  Of  confession 
of  faith  w^e  read  nothing,  and  the  thing  itself 
is  incredible.  To  believe  that  there  was  faith 
in  the  whole  mass,  is  more  than  the  most 
credulous  will  find  it  in  his  power  to  do. 
6 


62  OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE. 

Upon  what  principle  then  were  these  multi- 
tudes admitted  to  the  seal  of  the  covenant? 
If  not  upon  faith,  which  they  did  not  profess  ; 
if  not  upon  confession,  which  they  did  not 
make  ;  if  not  upon  the  rights  of  their  imme- 
diate parents,  which  had  been  forfeited  by 
transgression,  what  could  it  have  been,  but 
their  relation  to  Abraham,  as  the  seed,  to 
whom  the  promise  was  given  ? 

With  respect  to  the  general  practice  of  the 
church,  till  some  one  can  be  found  to  believe 
that  evidence  of  piety  in  the  parent,  was  con- 
sidered requisite  to  entitle  the  child  to  the  ini- 
tiatory ordinance,  I  shall  be  content  to  say 
that  it  was  7iot,  simply  adding,  that  there 
was  no  difference  in  this  respect  between  the 
practice  under  the  worthiest  monarchs,  and 
the  holiest  priests,  and  that  under  men  of  the 
very  opposite  character. 

SECTION  V. 

The  principle  that  the  children  of  wicked 
parents,  who  are  themselves  in  covenant,  are 
to  be  regarded  as  members  of  the  church, 
and  consequently  entitled  to  their  initiatory 


OF  THE  INITIATORY  ORDINANCE.  63 

rite,  is  uneqiuvocally  recognized  in  Scripture. 
As  a  general  Scriptural  rule,  it  will  be  ad- 
mitted, that  "  the  childi'en's  teeth  are  not  to 
be  set  on  edge  because  the  fathers  have  eaten 
sour  grapes."  But  something  more  specific 
will  be  demanded,  and  it  shall  be  fmiiished. 
Ezekiel  will  furnish  the  text,  and  a  worthy 
divine  Avho  differs  with  me  in  toto  on  the 
general  doctrine  of  these  chapters,  w411  fur- 
nish the  commentary.  In  the  16th  chapter 
of  the  Prophet,  it  is  thus  vn:itten:  "  Moreover 
thou  hast  taken  thy  sons  and  thy  daughters 
whom  thou  hast  borne  unto  me,  and  these  hast 
sacrificed  unto  them  to  be  devoured.  Is  this 
thy  whoredom  a  small  matter,  that  thou  hast 
slain  my  childi'en,  and  delivered  them  to  cause 
them  to  pass  through  the  fire  for  them  ?  " 

The  Commentator  in  a  sermon  entitled 
"  The  Question  Answered,"  and  designed  ex- 
pressly to  prove  that  none  but  the  children  of 
believers,  are  entitled  to  the  ordinance  of  bap- 
tism, thus  writes  :  "They  belong  to  the  Lord. 
He  claims  them  for  his  own.  By  his  gracious 
appointment,  they  are  relatively  in  a  holier, 
and  nearer  relation  to  him,  than  the  children 


64         OF    THE    INITIATORY   ORDINANCE. 

of  unbelievers.  They  not  only  viay,  but  they 
must  be  devoted  to  hhn,  for  they  are  holy  to  the 
Lord.  This  is  evident  from  Jehovah's  lan- 
guage to  the  children  of  Israel,  v^hen  having 
charged  them  with  offering  their  children  to 
idols,  he  adds,  '  Thou  hast  slain  my  children.' 
This  is  the  only  Scriptural  sense  in  which  they 
can  with  propriety  be  called  lioly^  as  God 
claims  them  for  himself.  As  we  may  and  do 
devote  them  to  the  Lord,  the  epithet  is  properly 
applied.  It  certainly  relates  neither  to  holi- 
ness of  heart  nor  life."  This  passage  is  full 
of  strong  sense,  yet  perplexity  attends  the 
contemplation  of  its  position.  The  object  of 
the  discourse  is  to  prove  that  the  church  ought 
not  to  acknowledge  as  her's^  a  class  of  chil- 
dren, which  the  text  quoted  from  the  Prophet 
pronounces  to  be  owned  by  the  "  Maker  and 
Husband"  of  the  church  as  his  !  "  Thou  hast 
slain  my  children."  The  circumstance  that 
the  author  makes  use  of  this  text  only  in  refer- 
ence to  the  general  subject  of  infant  rights, 
does  not  relieve  him  from  the  embarrassment 
produced  by  the  Prophet's  language,  and  his 
own  commentary.  For  if  the  children  of  those 


OF    THE    INITIATORY    ORDINANCE.         65 

who  were  so  depraved  as  to  have  become  the 
most  ciTiel  idolaters,  are  7iot  to  be  acknow- 
ledged as  "  relatively  in  a  holier  and  nearer 
relation  to  God,"  than  any  other  children,  then 
is  the  text  without  force  and  meaning  on  the 
general  subject  of  infant  rights.  On  the  other 
hand,  if  the  children  of  such  parents^  being 
themselves  in  covenant,  are  hohj,  i.  e.  rela- 
tively in  a  holier  and  nearer  relation  to  God, 
than  the  childi'cn  of  those  who  are  not  in  cove- 
nant with  him,  then  the  text  proves  too  much 
for  the  design  of  our  author,  and  a  vast  deal 
more  than  all  the  rest  of  the  sermon  can  dis- 
prove. Assume  that  the  personal  piety  of 
parents  is  essential  to  the  children's  covenant 
holiness,  and  then  the  children  of  the  idolatrous 
Jews  were  not  God's  children — they  did  not 
stand  in  a  relatively  holier  and  nearer  relation 
to  him  than  others — they  were  not  Jioly,  all 
which  amounts  to  a  flat  denial  of  the  text.  By 
making  the  rights  of  the  children  to  depend 
upon  the  promise  made  to  Abraham  and  to  his 
seed  as  a  mass — an  aggregation,  each  of  the 
parts  of  which,  sustain  the  same  relation  to 

Abraham,  as  any  other  part,  both  the  text  and 
6* 


66         OF  THE    INITIATORY   ORDINANCE. 

the  commentary  are  duly  honoured ;  the  same 
principle  is  seen  to  pervade  this  covenant,  which 
has  been  shown  to  pervade  the  other  covenants 
which  transmit  their  stipulations  by  natural 
generation  ;  the  covenant  holiness  of  the  chil- 
dren of  these  idolatrous  Jews  is  explained,  and 
the  doctrine  of  this  essay  is  established. 

It  will  not  do  to  say  that  the  argument  by 
proving  that  the  children  of  the  worst  of  pa- 
rents are  entitled  to  the  seal,  proves  too  much, 
and  therefore  proves  nothing.     No  more  is 
proved  than  God  declares  to  be  fact ;  and  if 
that  be  too  much  in  the  judgment  of  any,  they 
must  carry  the  controversy  before  a  higher 
tribunal  than  ours.     But  where  God  leads  the 
way,  let  none  refuse  to  follow.     They  may 
rest  assured  that  they  will  be  safely  conducted 
to  the  dwelling  place  of  holiness  and  truth. 
But  the  terror  is  needless  on  another  account. 
The  argument  does  not  prove  that  the  idola- 
trous Jews  did  not  deserve  to  be  disciplined  ; 
it  only  proves  that  they  had  not  been  cut  off 
from  the  comrrefration  of  the  Lord — that  there 
is  no  such  thing  as  virtual,  or  self-discipline 
known  in  the  Scriptures — and  that  no  power 


OF    THE    INITIATORY   ORDINANCE.         67 

under  heaven  (I  use  the  language  of  another) 
can  exclude  a  child  from  the  church,  whose 
parent  was  in  covenant  at  the  time  of  its  birth. 

The  five  arguments  presented  in  these  sec- 
tions are  beheved  to  afford  a  sufficient  founda- 
tion on  which  to  rest  the  conclusion,  that  each 
individual  of  the  Jewish  family  is  to  be  re- 
garded in  the  matter  of  the  covenant,  as  the 
immediate  child  of  Abraham,  or  in  other  words 
a  child  of  the  church ;  and  that  his  right  to  the 
seal  is  established  by  this  relation.  The  pro- 
mise is  to  the  seed,  and  the  child  of  an  unwor- 
thy parent  is  just  as  much  of  the  seed,  as  if 
the  parent  were  worthy.  And  in  the  chain 
which  connects  such  a  child  with  the  common 
parent,  the  links  may  be  fewer,  and  many  of 
them  brighter  than  are  to  be  found  in  those, 
which  connect  the  children  of  the  pious  with 
the  same  covenant  head. 

It  will  occur  to  most  readers,  yet  it  will  still 
be  proper  distinctly  to  notice,  that  in  the  above 
conclusion,  there  is  involved  the  idea  that  the 
child's  covenant  rights  are  its  own  rights.  It 
is  manifestly  improper  to  represent  the  right 
as  the  parent's,  of  which  he  avails  himself 


68         OF  THE    INITIATORY    ORDINANCE. 

when  he  presents  his  child  to  receive  the  ini- 
tiatory ordinance.  The  promise  is  not  to  the 
parent  to  be  handed  down  by  him,  provided  he 
be  a  suitable  person  to  make  the  conveyance 
to  the  child.  The  promise  is  direct  to  the 
child  itself  as  a  part  of  the  seed ;  and  so  soon 
as  it  is  born,  it  is  as  independent  of  the  parent 
in  regard  to  ecclesiastical  rights,  as  the  parent 
is  of  it.  By  depriving  it  of  its  rights,  you 
deprive  the  parent  of  none.  You  discipline 
it^  if  you  will  call  it  discipline,  not  him ;  and 
you  make  yourself  responsible  to  God  for  re- 
jecting those,  of  whom  he  has  said  they  are 
''my  children.^^ 


j  CHAPTER  VI. 

i  OF    THE   INFLUENCE  OF  THE  COVENANT    RELA- 

TION OF  THE  PARENT  UPON  THE  RIGHTS 
OF  THE  CHILD  UNDER  THE  NEW  DISPEN- 
SATION. 

By  going  to  the  Abrahamic  covenant  for  our 
doctrine  of  infant  church-membership,  we 
bind  ourselves  by  the  principles  and  rules  of 
that  covenant.  The  Baptists  reject  the  cove- 
nant altogether,  and  although  they  are  believed 
most  capitally  to  err  in  this,  yet  it  is  due  to 
them  to  say,  that  there  is  far  less  inconsistency 
in  their  plan,  than  there  is  in  that  of  those,  who 
receive  it  in  some  respects,  and  reject  it  in 
others.  This  is  certainly  done  by  those  who 
refuse  to  apply  its  principles  to  the  extent  of 
the  terms,  in  which  they  are  expressed,-  and 
after  the  pattern  furnished  by  the  history  of 
the  initiatory  ordinance  in  the  word  of  God. 

If  the  covenant  be  still  in  force,  it  certainly 
cannot  be  competent  for  us  to  weave  into  the 
doctrine  of  baptism,  or  into  the  warrant  for  its 


70  INFLUENCE    OF    THE 

application,  any  confessions  or  personal  quali- 
fications, which  are  unknown  to  that  original 
charter  of  the  church.  Our  privileges,  and 
the  privileges  of  our  children,  are  as  great  as 
those  of  the  ancient  Jews.  And  unless  the 
New  Testament  Church  be  that  bundle  of 
sticks,  w^hich  Dr.  Gill  makes  it,  unsupported 
by  stock  or  root,  and  wholly  incapable  of  pro- 
ducing a  single  bud,  even  "  though  the  scent 
of  xoater^''  we  shall  undoubtedly  partake  of 
"the  root  and  fatness  of  the  good  olive  tree." 
Even  those  children  of  the  church,  whose  pa- 
rents are  no  better  than  the  untoward  Jews 
were,  are  as  much  of  tlie  seed  ecclesiastically 
as  theirs  were ;  they  will  be  as  certainly  owned 
of  God  as  his  children;  and  should  as  unhesi- 
tatingly be  owned  of  the  church  as  hers. 

These  remaks  are  entitled  to  full  influence, 
unless  it  can  be  shown  that  there  is  somethins; 
to  forbid  it,  either  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  or 
in  some  express  New  Testament  provision. 

As  for  the  children  themselves,  to  whom 
privileges  are  to  be  sealed,  without  at  all  add- 
ing to  those  already  enjoyed  by  the  parents, 
who  conceives  of  a  difference  betw^een  them, 


COVENANT    RELATION.  71 

either  from  nature  or  from  grace?  It  might 
be  wellj  if  an  inquiry  were  instituted  into  the 
precise  nature  of  the  reason,  why  spiritual 
quahties  in  the  parent  who  is  in  actual  cove- 
nant, should  be  insisted  on  in  order  to  give  his 
child  aright  to  the  initiatory  ordinance.  What- 
ever right  a  child  has,  is  derived  to  it,  through 
its  natural  7'elation  to  its  parent.  Through 
this  relation  alone  it  is  transmitted,  and  no  right 
is  conveyed,  but  such  as  is  conveyable  through 
this  channel.  We  can  conceive  of  a  right  to 
an  external  ordinance,  or  a  right  to  external 
privileges,  being  thus  conveyed ;  because  they 
result  from  i^elations,  but  of  the  conveyance  of 
spiritual  things,  or  grace  in  such  a  way,  we 
can  form  no  conception.  If  then  the  children 
of  the  two  classes  in  the  covenant  of  the 
church,  the  children  of  the  pious,  and  the  chil- 
dren of  those  who  are  not  pious,  are  all  alike, 
confessedly  in  a  state  of  nature — if  the  privi- 
leges proposed  to  be  sealed  to  them,  are  con- 
veyable by  natioral  relations — and  if  these 
privileges  are  to  be  sealed  to  the  children 
themselves,  without  adding  to  those  already 
enjoyed  by  the  parents,  from  what  can  the 


72  INFLUENCE    OF  THE 

influence  proceed  which  demands  a  distinc- 
tion, unless  it  be  from  some  vague,  confused, 
indefinable  conception  of  spiritual  qualities, 
transmissible,  and  transmitted  from  the  pious 
parent  to  his  offspring  ?  As  far  as  the  exclu- 
sive doctrine  deserves  favour  from  a  mere 
feeling  of  fitness  and  congruity  in  the  plan, 
which  excludes  from  the  church  the  children 
of  all  who  are  not  supposed  to  possess  piet}^, 
just  so  far  is  this  mystic  fancy  allowed  to  inter- 
fere with  the  constitution  of  the  church  of 
God.  It  would  perhaps  be  deemed  unkind 
even  to  suggest  a  suspicion,  that  in  any  case 
the  idea  is  intended  to  be  entertained,  that  gra- 
cious qualities  are  conveyed  by  natural  gene- 
ration ;  but  besides  that  there  may  be  many 
things  floating  in  the  imagination,  and  produc- 
ing efl'ects  without  our  consciousness,  it  may 
be  said  that  of  so  wonderful  an  ante-type,  the 
necessity  of  personal  piety  to  give  validity  to 
a  right  conveyed  by  natural  generation,  is  a 
most  suitable  and  worthy  type. 

The  gi-and  peculiarity  of  the  covenant,  is  the 
conveyance  of  the  right  to  the  seal,  by  natural 
relation  from  the  parent  to  the  child.     The 


COVENANT    RELATION.  73 

principle  involved  in  this  peculiarity,  which 
excludes,  as  has  been  seen,  the  idea  of  the 
transmission  of  grace,  together  with  the  child's 
own  acknowledged   destitution  of  grace   in 
itself,  coniii'ms  to  the  church  under  the  New 
Dispensation,  all  the  essential  attributes,  which 
distinguished  her  under  the  Old.     While  she 
acts  upon  the  principle  of  receiving  the  great 
body  of  her  members  at  an  age,  when  the 
dream  of  their  being  in  a  gracious  state,  what- 
ever may  be  the  piety  of  their  parents,  would 
be  the  wildest  of  all  dreams,  there  may  be 
benevolence  in  the  desire,  that  she  should  be 
holier  than  she  is,  but  the  wisdom  is  more  than 
questionable  that  attempts  to  make  her  so,  by 
casting  out  of  her  pale  vast  multitudes,  as  good 
as   those   she  receives,   and  whose  right  of 
admission  by  the  strictest  construction  of  the 
charter,  are  as  unquestionable  as  theirs.     By 
an  universal  law,  as  large  rights  can  be  con- 
veyed by  natural  relations  under  the  New 
Economy,  as   under   the  Old.     And   by  an 
equally  extensive  law,  which  like  the  other,  is 
simply  the  nature  of  the  case,  grace  is  as  un- 
transmissible  now  as  it  was  then.     As  a  con- 
7 


74  INFLUENCE   OP    THE 

sequence  of  this,  where  we  might  otherwise 
look  for  fruit,  we  find  it  not.  When  we  go 
about  to  purify  the  church  of  God,  by  distin- 
guishing between  children  that  are  exactly 
alike  in  themselves,  and  bom  of  parents  in 
covenant,  we  probably  make  out  about  as  well 
as  mortals  generally  do,  when  they  attempt  to 
improve  upon  the  ordinances  of  Heaven. 
Whether  some  peculiar  glory  may  not  be 
thrown  around  this  "  special  eifort,"  by  the 
fact,  that  while  the  children  who  by  no  act  of 
theirs  could  forfeit  their  rights,  are  thrust  outj 
the  parents,  who  are  judged  to  have  forfeited 
theirs  by  their  sins,  are  left  within  the  church, 
is  submitted  to  the  consideration  of  the  wise, 
the  just,  and  the  benevolent.  Be  their  judg- 
ment what  it  may,  a  sound  will  linger  on  our 
ears— "As  the  newAvine  is  found  in  the  clus- 
ter, and  one  saith  destroy  it  not,  for  a  blessing 
is  in  it ;  so  saith  the  Lord  will  I  do  for  my 
servant's  sake,  that  I  may  not  destroy  them 
all ;''  and  as  we  listen,  the  question  from  the 
action  of  our  noblest  sentiments  rises,  why 
should  not  the  spiritual  husbandman  do  so 


COVENANT    RELATION.  75 

also,  with  the  tender  ckistcrs  in  the  vineyard 
of  the  Lord? 

There  is  a  sovereignty  of  grace  in  God's 
designation  of  the  heirs  to  the  external  inheri- 
tance of  the  church,  which  is  closely  anala- 
gous  to  that  by  which  "  the  joint  heirs  with 
Christ "  are  appointed  to  their  everlasting  re- 
ward.  We  interfere  with  this  sovereignty  of 
grace,  when  we  insist  upon  the  merits  of  a 
pious  parentage,  as  necessary  to  secure  an 
interest  to  the  children  in  a  dispensation  of 
mercy.  The  plan  is  not  God's.  Abraham 
was  called  from  an  idolatrous  country  and 
kindred.  The  great  mass  of  the  immediate 
parents  of  the  Abrahamic  tribes,  were  rebel- 
lious to  a  proverb.  Yet  the  seed  God  owned 
as  his.  .  As  none  were  chosen  for  their  own, 
or  their  father's  merits  ;  so  those  merits  could 
not  secure  what  gi'ace  had  not  resolved  to  give. 
Isaac  was  a  man  of  God,  yet  of  his  children 
is  it  written,  "  Jacob  have  I  loved,  but  Esau 
have  I  hated."  ''  He  hath  mercy  on  whom  he 
will  have  mercy."  For  myself,  when  I  see  a 
number  of  children  presented  for  the  holy 
ordinance  of  baptism,  some  the  offspring  of 


76  INFLUENCE    OF    THE 

pious  parents,  and  others  not,  instead  of  trem- 
bling at  the  profanation  of  holy  things,  which 
a  portion  of  the  service  appears  to  present  to 
some,  I  think  I  see,  andAvith  a  rejoicing  spirit 
too,  that  which  is  analagous  to  the  movements 
of  God,  as  he  goes  forth  for  the  accomplish- 
ment of  the  purposes  of  his  grace.  Here 
he  takes  the  child  of  many  prayers  and  tears ; 
there  he  quickens  and  saves  the  offspring  of 
the  Christless  and  profane.  Do  you  ask  the 
reason  ?  It  is  the  very  same  as  that,  which 
designated  the  subjects  of  the  external  means 
of  grace.  "  He  hath  mercy  on  whom  he  will 
have  mercy."  And  surely  the  New  Testament 
Dispensation  furnishes  as  ample  a  field  for  the 
manifestation  of  the  sovereignty  of  grace,  in 
all  its  varied  forms,  as  imagination  can  con- 
ceive. And  here  it  will  reign,  in  spite  of  our 
ungracious  doctrine  of  the  merit  of  parental 
piety. 

The  only  difficulty  with  which  many  minds 
are  plagued,  arises  from  the  doings  of  the 
church  herself.  The  form  of  baptism  of  the 
Dutch  Church,  goes  far  to  incorporate  the 
action  of  the  parent,  with  the  rite  of  baptism 


COVENANT    RELATION.  77 

of  the  child.  With  all  my  veneration  for  her, 
whom  I  shall  rejoice  to  call  my  mother  till  my 
d)ring  day,  I  could  wish  that  the  way  was 
opened  to  make  the  act  more  exclusively  the 
act  of  the  church.  The  promises  which  are 
now  required,  and  which  form  no  part  of  the 
baptism  itself,  are  often  required  under  cir- 
cumstances, which  give  offence  to  the  consci- 
entious. Were  such  an  arrangement  made  as 
would  do  away  with  this  difficulty,  and  present 
the  church  in  the  attitude  of  a  mother  offering 
her  own  cliild  to  God,  and  binding  herself  to 
take  care  of  it  for  him,  as  she  is  unquestion- 
ably bound  to  do,  a  spectacle  would  be  pre- 
sented, which  instead  of  appearing  to  profane 
the  holy  things  of  the  sanctuary,  would  pre- 
eminently magnify,  and  illustrate  the  grace 
which  reigns  in  the  constitution  of  the  visible 
chm'ch.  But  even  as  it  is,  the  chm-ch's  wrong 
in  the  circumstance  of  baptism,  should  not  be 
-allowed  to  cancel  rights,  which  are  secured 
by  the  everlasting  covenant  of  God. 
7* 


CHAPTER  VII. 

QUALIFICATIONS    FOR    ADULT    BAPTISM THE 

SUPERIOR  SPIRITUALITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN 
CHURCH CHRISTIAN  EDUCATION. 

If  there  be  no  express  modification  of  the 
covenant  in  regard  to  the  proper  subjects  of 
the  seal,  and  if  there  be  nothing  in  the  nature 
of  the  case  requiring  a  different  rule  under 
the  New  Testament,  from  that  under  the  Old, 
something  most  undoubted  and  unequivocal 
in  the  way  of  inference  is  required  to  justify 
a  departure  from  the  practice  of  receiving  in- 
to the  church,  all  that  are  bom  of  parents  in 
covenant — i.  e.  parents  who  have  been  bap- 
tized, and  who  have  notbeen  excluded  from  the 
church,  by  regular  discipline, 

1.  For  the  purpose  of  justifying  such  a 
departure,  great  stress  has  been  laid  on  the 
requirement  of  faith  in  Adults,  in  order  to 
their  own  baptism.  "I  am  not  aware,''  says 
one,  ^'from  any  facts,  or  principles  in  the 


ADULT  BAPTISM.  79 

New  Testament,  of  any  profession  of  faith 
being  sufficient  for  admission  to  Baptism, 
that  is  not  sufficient  for  admission  to  the 
Lord's  Supper,  and  the  full  fellowship  of  the 
church  of  Christ."  After  referring  to  the 
Eunuch,  "from  this  case  it  is  evident,"  says 
another,  "that  a  refusal  to  confess  his  faith, 
would  have  debarred  him  from  the  ordi- 
nance." Others  pursue  the  same  strain;  and 
all  are  unquestionably  in  the  right.  So  far 
are  those  who  differ  from  these  writers  on 
the  main  question  under  consideration,  from 
disputing  the  statements  here  made,  that 
they  take  pleasiue  in  expressing  their  entire 
conviction  of  their  truth.  They  insist  as  strenu- 
ously as  any  others,  on  the  necessity  of  a  cre- 
dible confession  of  faith  in  all  adults,  in  order 
to  entitle  them  to  baptism;  but  they  never 
imagined  that  the  qualifications  necessary  in 
an  adult  candidate  for  baptism,  could  be  made 
a  rule  by  which  to  settle  the  rights  of  an  in- 
fant, which  are  secured  to  it  by  covenant. 
The  cases  appear  to  be  too  manifestly  differ- 
ent, to  admit  of  their  being  subjected  to  the 
same  rule.     The  adult  claims  privileges  on 


80  QUALIFICATIONS    FOR 

the  ground  of  his  owm  personal  qualifications ; 
but  these  are  excluded  from  the  case  of  the 
infant.  To  asswne  that  the  claim  is  on  the 
personal  qualifications  of  the  parent,  which  is 
the  very  point  at  issue,  affords  a  specimen  of 
logic,  which  there  is  no  particular  necessity  of 
attempting  to  refute. 

Whethej-  the  Jews  reasoned  as  we  do  on 
this  subject  or  not,  they  came  to  the  same 
conclusion.  For  while  they  circumcised  all 
the  males  according  to  the  command  of  God, 
they  observed  the  most  scrupulous  care  with 
all  whom  they  received  from  without.  "  Prose- 
lytes of  justice,"  says  Calmet,  "were  those 
converts  to^  Judaism,  Avho  had  engaged  to 
receive  circumcision,  and  to  observe  the 
whole  law  of  Moses.  Thus  they  were  ad- 
mitted to  all  the  prerogatives  of  the  people  of 
God,  as  well  in  this  life,  as  the  other.  The 
Rabbins  inform  us,  that  before  circumcision 
was  administered  to  them,  and  they  were  ad- 
mitted to  the  religion  of  the  Hebrews,  they 
were  examined  about  the  motives  of  their 
conversion ;  whether  the  change  was  volun- 
tary, or  whether  it  proceeded  from  interest, 


ADULT   BAPTISM.  81 

fear,  ambition,  &c."  It  is  manifest  that  the 
demand  of  a  confession  from  a  convert,  in  or- 
der to  his  reception  of  the  initiatory  seal,  has 
never  been  considered  as  having  anything  to 
do  with  the  covenant  rights  of  the  children  of 
the  church. 

2.  The  promise  of  the  increased  spirituality 
of  the  church  in  New  Testament  times,  is  re- 
lied upon  by  some  as  having  an  important 
bearing  on  the  question  imder  consideration. 
The  argument  seems  to  be,  that  the  loose  way 
of  acting  upon  the  covenant,  after  the  manner 
of  the  Jews,  might  do  very  well  for  their 
times  of  formality  and  spiritual  barrenness, 
but  that  such  a  course  is  entirely  inconsistent 
with  the  increased  spirituality  of  the  Chris- 
tian church.  I  would  not  be  guilty  of  injus- 
tice ;  and  if  in  stating  the  argiunent  in  this 
way,  I  have  wronged  the  brethern,  I  humbly 
beg  their  pardon.  I  have  done  the  best  I 
could ;  for  I  can  understand  the  argument  in 
no  other  way,  than  as  most  unhappily  reflect- 
ing upon  the  character  of  the  constitution  of 
the  church  of  God.  That  constitution  was 
designed  to  be  perpetual ;  but  if  it  be  not  suit- 


82  QUALIFICATIONS    FOR 

ed  to  the  condition  of  the  churcli  in  her  pre- 
sent state,  then  does  it  not  bear  the  usual 
mark  of  his  hand,  who  is  wonderful  in  coun- 
sel, and  mighty  in  work. 

But  man  cannot  mend  it ;  and  he  need  not, 
if  he  could,  in  order  to  suit  it  to  any  condition 
of  the  church,  which  the  most  ardent  piety 
can  desire.  The  spiritual  prosperity  of  the 
kingdom  is  to  be  effected  by  the  grace  of  the 
Sovereign.  The  church  shall  prosper,  when 
God  shall  "pour  out  his  spirit  upon  our  seed, 
and  his  blessing  upon  our  offspring."  "  They 
shall  then  grow  up  as  willows  by  the  water 
courses."  But  a  consummation  so  devoutly 
to  be  wished,  and  so  ardently  to  be  prayed  for, 
is.  not  likely  to  be  the  result  of  rooting  up  our 
children  from  beside  the  streams  of  salvation, 
and  casting  them  out  of  the  heritage  of  the 
Lord.  I  do  not  say  that  God  will  refuse  the 
blessing  wherever  the'  tender  plants  are 
thrust  out ;  but  I  do  say,  that  the  mamier  in 
which  its  bestowment  is  usually  expressed 
by  the  prophets,  is  most  consonant  to  the 
idea,  that  the  blessing  will  be  in  proportion  to 
the  multitudes  of  those  who  by  virtue  of  the 


ADULT    BAPTISM.  83 

covenant,  are  brought  directly  under  the  in- 
fluence of  the  means  of  grace  which  it  pro- 
vides. 

3.  Another  idea  is,  that  the  rehgious  edu- 
cation of  the  children  by  the  parents,  is  so 
much  the  reason  and  end  of  baptism,  that 
when  the  character  of  the  parent  is  such,  as 
to  afford  no  reasonable  hope  that  the  proper 
instruction  will  be  afforded,  the  ordinance 
ought  not  to  be  administered.  The  more  in- 
telhgent,  and  considerate,  coimect  the  Chris- 
tian education  of  children,  with  other  uses  of 
baptism.  There  is,  however,  but  little  doubt, 
that  the  failure  of  many  parents  in  the  matter 
of  instruction,  constitutes  the  grand  difficulty 
in  multitudes  of  minds,  against  an  administra- 
tion of  baptism,  commensurate  with  the  terms 
of  the  covenant. 

The  general  argument  from  the  uses  of  a 
divine  appointment,  is  of  the  most  doubtful 
and  unsatisfactory  character.  It  supposes  that 
we  are  far  more  intimately  acquainted  with 
the  reason,  and  end  of  the  institutions  of  God, 
than  true  modesty  will  allow  us  to  consider 
ourselves  to  be.  Besides,  there  is  no  satisfying 


84  QUALIFICATIONS    FOR 

even  pious  and  intelligent  minds  on  topics  of 
this  kind.  When  a  pious  Baptist  asks  what 
is  the  use  of  infant  baptism?  or  a  Quaker 
what  is  the  use  of  water  baptism  at  all?  the 
true  way  to  answer  both,  is  to  tell  them  that 
the  validity  of  ordinances,  depends  not  upon 
the  judgment  we  may  form  of  their  uses,  but 
upon  the  appointment  of  God.  They  should 
therefore  be  referred  to  the  institution  itself; 
if  that  be  unquestionable,  though  we  were 
unable  to  designate  a  single  valuable  end  to 
be  accomplished,  the  argument  would  be  com- 
plete for  the  validity  of  the  ordinance,  and 
the  propriety  and  duty  of  administering  it, 
whether  they  were  satisfied  or  not. 

These  remarks  are  not  designed  to  dis- 
courage investigation  into  the  ordinances  of 
God's  house  ;  but  only  to  evince  the  impro- 
priety of  allowing  our  conception  of  their 
useSf  to  bear  upon  the  question  of  fact,  whe- 
ther an  appointment  has  been  made  or  not . 
or  upon  the  question  of  right,  whether  an  ordi- 
ance  is  to  be  administered  or  not. 

So  far  as  the  Christian  education  of  children 
is   concerned,  if  the  probability  that  it  will 


ADULT  BAPTISM.  85 

be  neglected  by  the  parent,  offering  his  child 
for  baptism,  is  to  have  any  thing  to  do  in  de- 
termining the  question,  whether  the  right  to 
the  ordinance  exists  in  the  case  or  not,  we  are 
entertained  with  this  wonderful  proposition  ; 
that  the  present  rights  of  one,  are  to  be  de- 
termined by  the  probable  future  doings  of 
another.  This  proposition  needs  much  ex- 
planation, in  order  to  be  miderstood;  and 
much  proof,  to  entitle  it  to  be  believed.  For 
one,  I  despair  of  ever  arriving  at  the  under- 
standing, or  the  belief. 

But  whence  was  the  idea  derived  that  the 
validity  of  the  initiatory  rite,  is  affected  by  the 
amount,  or  character  of  the  instruction  which 
the  initiated  is  likely  to  receive  ?  Does  the 
covenant  order  the  rite  to  be  administered, 
whenever  a  fair  prospect  is  presented,  that  the 
proper  instruction  will  be  afforded  ?  What  is 
the  character  of  the  right  itself?  Is  it  a  seal 
of  the  righteousness  of  faith?  Must  it  de- 
pend upon  what  may  be  done  through  a  series 
of  years  after  the  administration,  whether  such 
is  the  real  character  of  the  ordinance  when 

administered,  or  whether  it  be  something  else, 
8 


86  QUALIFICATIONS  FOR 

or  nothing  at  all  ?  Does  the  institution  specify 
any  difference  between  the  baptism  of  an  adult, 
and  that  of  an  infant,  either  as  to  the  signifi- 
cancy,  or  the  duties  that  are  involved  ?  There 
is  but  "one  baptism." 

The  duty  of  parents  to  bring  up  their  chil- 
dren in  the  knowledge  and  fear  of  God,  and 
which  is  m-ged  as  fully  and  forcibl}'"  under  the 
Old  Dispensation  where  every  man  child  was 
circumcised,  as  under  the  New,  is  binding  on 
all  parents,  whether  their  children  are  baptized 
or  not.     Baptism  does  not  originate  or  create 
the  obligation.     A  parent  who  dedicates  his 
child  to  God,  will  be  brought;  if  rightly  dis- 
posed, to  feel  the  force  of  a  new  motive  to 
fidelity ;  but  neither  the  doctrine  of  intention, 
nor  the  doctrine   of  performance  on  his  part, 
is  necessary  to  give  validity  to  a  divine  ordi- 
nance, nor  to  determine  the  right  or  propriety 
of  its  application. 

There  is  another  feature  of  the  sentiment 
under  review,  which  is  as  exceptionable  as 
any  that  has  been  considered.  The  importance 
which  it  assigns  to  parental  instruction,  and 
the  manner  in  which  that  instruction  ig  some- 


ADULT    BAPTISM.  87 

times  spoken  of,  goes  far  to  screen  the  church 
from  Aer  ow7i  obligations.     The  parent  has 
his  own  pecuhar  obhgations  to  perform  as  a 
parent.     The  chiu-ch,  which  as  a  body  claims 
the  ecclesiastical  maternity  of  his  child,  has 
her  duty  to  perform.     She  is  bound  to  furnish 
instruction  in  the  doctrines  and  duties   of  the 
covenant,  whose  seal  she  has  placed  upon  her 
offspring.     If  she  leave  this  duty  to  be  per- 
formed alone  by  any  parent,  however  pious, 
she  is  guilty  of  a  dereliction  of  duty.     The 
church  is  ihe  principal — the  parents,  as  mem- 
bers   of  the   church,    are   only    subordinate 
teachers.   Christ  directed  his  disciples  to  bap- 
tize all  nations,  teaching  them  to  observe  all 
things  that  he  had  commanded.     This  order 
is  given   to  the  teachers,  and  rulers  of  the 
house  of  God;    and  it  makes  no  distinction 
between  adults,  and  the  younger   subjects  of 
the  Christian  ordinance.     The  spirit  of  this 
order  and  the  nature  of  the  ecclesiastical  in- 
stitution, demand  that  in  addition  to  all  that 
can  be  expected  from  the  piety  and  affection 
of  the   parent,    the   children  of  the   church 
should,  as  such,  be  instructed  by  the  church. 


88  QUALIFICATIONS    FOR 

Of  that  usage  which  puts  upon  an  individual 
the  duties  of  the  whole  body,  I  have  spoken 
before.  In  addition  to  the  objection  then 
made,  I  object  to  it  here,  as  it  is  calculated 
to  produce  the  impression,  that  the  parent  is 
the  principal  party  in  the  transaction,  on  the 
score  of  responsibility ;  whereas,  from  the  na- 
ture of  the  transaction,  he  is  relinquishing,  to 
a  certain  extent,  and  for  certain  religious  pur- 
poses, his  natural  claim  to  the  exclusive  con- 
trol of  his  own  child,  giving  it  up  to  the  church ; 
which  becomes  the  proper  sponsor  for  its 
Christian  education.  Were  these  principles 
adopted  in  practice,  we  should  hear  no  more  of 
parents  perjuring  themselves  by  the  baptis- 
mal vows  which  they  make,  nor  of  the  church 
making  herself  accessory  to  the  abomination, 
by  allowing  the  vows  to  be  made.  Those 
children  of  the  church  whose  parents  neglect 
their  spiritual  interest,  would  not  be  left  as 
if  there  were  none  to  care  for  their  souls  ; 
and  the  presentation  of  such  a  child  to  be  re- 
ceived into  the  maternal  arms  of  the  church? 
instead  of  furnishing  an  occasion  of  offence 
to  any,  would  present  a  scene  which  angels 


ADULT    BAPTISM.  89 

would  love  to  look  upon;  and  which  would 
awaken  in  the  bosoms  of  all,  who  remember 
from  what  they  had  been  brought  to  the  hopes 
of  the  Gospel,  sentiments,  miderthe  influence 
of  which,  it  would  be  felt  that  God  did  not 
forget  the  congregation  of  his  poor  forever; 
and  that  he  had  respect  unto  the  covenant 
though  the  dark  places  of  the  earth  were  full 
of  the  habitations  of  cruelty ;  and  the  church 
herself  were  marred  by  many  imperfections. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

1.  Cor.  vii.  14. 

WHAT  IS    TO   BE   UNDERSTOOD    BY    BELIEVERS 

NO    CASE     IN     THE     NEW      TESTAMENT 

APPOSITE    TO    THE   PRESENT    QUESTION. 

The  text — "The  unbelieving  husband  is 
sanctified  by  the  wife,  and  the  unbeheving 
wife  is  sanctified  by  the  husband,  else  were 
your  children  unclean,  but  now  are  they 
holy,"  is  much  relied  upon,  to  prove  that 
faith  in  the  parent,  is  clearly  required  to  war- 
rant the  baptism  of  the  child. 

One  would  think  that  there  could  be  no 
difficulty  in  correctly  reading  the  16th  verse  of 
the  15th  chapter  of  Judges.  Yet  a  trial  made 
many  years  ago  is  recollected,  in  which  it 
appears  that  the  majority  even  of  good  readers, 
failed  in  the  first  attempt,  and  sometimes  in  a 
second.  Not  content  with  jaw  they  would 
insert  hone^  in  the  latter  part  of  the  sentence. 
A  similar  illusion  seems  to  rest  upon  the 


NEW    TESTAMENT    PROOFS.  91 

reading,  or  it  may  be  only  on  the  recollection 
of  the  Corinthian  text.  A  very  prevalent  idea 
is,  that  in  the  passage  it  is  said,  that  the  sanc- 
tifying parent  is  the  believing  parent ;  where- 
as the  word  believing  does  not  occur  at  all. 
The  unbelieving  husband  is  sanctified  by  the 
wifej  and  the  unbelieving  wife  is  sanctified  by 
t]ie  husband.  In  order  to  a  correct  under- 
standing of  the  passage,  it  is  according  to  the 
plainest  possible  dictate  of  common  sense, 
that  we  have  only  to  learn  from  the  Scriptures, 
what  parents  they  are,  whose  children  are  ac- 
counted holy. 

The  reader  will  recollect  the  proof  that  has 
been  adduced  by  a  writer  in  favour  of  the  cove- 
nant holiness  of  children  under  the  new  dis- 
pensation, from  the  covenant  holiness  of  those 
children  whose  imbeheving  and  wicked  pa- 
rents offered  them  in  sacrifice  to  idols.  These 
children  were  holy,  as  they  were  the  children 
of  the  church's  Maker  and  Husband,  being 
the  children  ofjparents  in  covenant,  unbeliev- 
ing though  they  were.  It  is  true,  the  same 
writer,  in  the  same  discourse,  declares  it  to 
be  a  fact^  that  the  children   of  unbelieving 


92^  WHAT    IS   TO    BE 

parents,  meaning  by  that,  not  infidel,  but  only 
not  pious  parents,  are  not  the  children  of  the 
church!  Similar  meetings  of  sentences  in 
mortal  conflict,  are  not  unusual  in  attempts 
at  the  vindication  of  error.  The  thing  is 
very  well,  for  truth  always  gains  by  the  en- 
counter. So  it  is  in  the  present  instance. 
Nor  could  it  be  otherwise.  If  a  force  be  tak- 
en from  the  camp  of  the  circumcised,  for  the 
purpose  of  driving  the  children  of  the  cove- 
nant from  their  inheritance,  when  the  battle 
comes,  something  is  sure  to  take  place,  that 
demonstrates  the  energy  of  that  principle  to 
which  the  princes  of  the  Philistines  paid  such 
a  philosophical  and  prudent  regard,  when 
they  refused  to  let  David  accompany  them 
to  the  battle  against  Israel.  As  David  in  the 
camp  of  the  uncircumcised,  so  is  the  text  from 
the  Prophet  in  the  discourse  of  our  author; 
and  it  produces  all  the  discomfiture  here,  that 
was  apprehended  by  the  wary  princes,  from 
the  presence  of  the  Israelitish  captain  then. 
But  the  consequence  cannot  be  avoided. 
The  text  from  the  prophet  is  genuine,  and 
the  proof  infallible.     Whatever  the  personal 


UNDERSTOOD  BY    BELIEVERS.  93 

cliaracter  of  those  in  covenant  may  be,  their 
childi-en  are  holy.  The  idea  is  in  harmony 
with  the  whole  current  of  Scripture.  The 
covenant  people  of  God  were  "formed  for 
himself,  a  peculiar  treasure  unto  him — a  holy 
nation — a  kingdom  of  priests."  The  plain 
and  obvious  meaning  of  the  passage  under 
consideration  then,  is  this — the  husband  who 
is  not  in  covenant,  is  sanctified  by  the  wife 
who  is  in  covenant ;  and  the  wife  who  is  not 
in  covenant,  is  sanctified  by  the  husband  who 
is  in  covenant,  else  were  the  children  unclean, 
or  aliens;  but  now  are  they  holy,  or  the 
children  of  the  covenant.  This  is  good  sense, 
and  good  theology.  The  parts  are  homogene- 
ous, and  unite  in  the  conclusion  designed  to 
be  established  by  the  Apostle. 

But  suppose  we  grant  to  the  love  of  antithesis, 
what  any  thing  short  of  a  perfect  spirit  of  ac- 
commodation would  be  unwilling  to  yield,  that 
the  term  believing,  ought  to  be  understood  in 
the  passage ;  nothing  would  be  gained  by  the 
concession,  unless  two  things  can  be  estab- 
lished. 1.  That  the  term  always  expresses 
in  the  Scripture,  what  is  usually  understood 


94  WHAT    IS    TO    BE 

by  evangelical  faith.  AH,  however,  know  that 
such  is  not  its  uniform  signification.  Simon 
Magus  is  said  to  have  believed,  only  because 
he  professed  to  believe.  Many  of  the  rulers 
are  said  to  have  believed,  merely  because 
they  had  a  rational  conviction  of  the  truth, 
though  they  did  not  confess,  for  fear  of  the 
Pharisees.  And  the  theologians  speak  en- 
tirely to  the  purpose,  when  they  represent 
even  infants  as  believers,  inasmuch  as  they 
are  ^^  in  numero  jideliiwi,^^  baptized  into  the 
faith,  and  members  of  the  body,  possessing, 
and  professing  the  true  doctrine  of  salvation. 
This  view  of  the  subject  gives  significancy 
and  beauty  to  that  expression  of  Christ,  — 
*' these  little  ones  that  believe  in  me;"  and 
should  put  to  rest  the  struggles  of  the  Bap- 
tists, to  give  age  to  infancy,  and  to  impute 
faith  where  there  is  no  capacity  for  its  exer- 
cise. Circumstances  must  determine  the 
specific  idea  to  be  attached  to  the  term  he- 
lieving ;  and  whenever  the  reference  is  to 
ecclesiastical  privileges,  actually  enjoyed,  we 
are  under  no  obligations  to  believe  more  than 
what  is   imphed  in   ecclesiastical  relations, 


UNDERSTOOD    BY   BELIEVERS.  95 

and  a  rational  acknowledgment  of  the  system 
of  truth,  professed  by  the  church. 

These  observations  will  explain  the  sense, 
in  which,  I  cannot  entertain  the  shadow  of  a 
doubt,  we  ought  to  understand  the  language 
of  our  standards.  The  terms  Christians, 
Believers,  Faithful,  Beloved  in  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ — do  7iot  beyond  all  controversy,  de- 
note the  children  of  God,  in  the  evangelical 
sense  ;  but  are  frequently  to  be  understood  in 
the  sense  ecclesiastical,  impl3ring  church  re- 
lations, and  a  rational  acknowledgment  of 
the  truth  of  those  doctrines,  which  the  church 
maintains.  It  would  require  a  melancholy 
change,  in  the  conceptions  which  I  have 
hitherto  entertained  of  the  benevolent  charac- 
ter of  the  institution  of  the  church,  were  I 
compelled  to  regard  it  as  consistent  with  her 
nature,  as  a  visible  organization,  and  her 
spirit  as  the  "mother  of  us  all,"  to  cast  off, 
and  treat  as  unbelievers  and  infidels,  those 
whom  she  received  professedly  in  a  state  of 
nature,  only  because  on  arriving  at  maturity, 
they  do  not  give  evidence  that  they  belong  to 
the  invisible  church,  of  which  herself  is  but 


96  WHAT    IS   TO   BE 

an  imperfect  emblem.  As  well  might  it  be 
expected  that  the  gracious  Lord  would  treat 
as  castaways,  all  whom  he  fomid  in  the 
kingdom  of  grace,  who  were  not  as  yet  meet 
for  the  kingdom  of  glory.  Why  did  He  re- 
ceive them  into  his  favour,  or  why  did  the 
church  take  her  children  in  her  arms  ?  Wliat 
has  become  of  the  virtue  of  baptism, 
which  "is  used  as  a  token  of  the  divine 
favour  to  believers  and  their  seed,"  which 
makes  to  them  an  exhibition  of  Gospel 
grace,  and  gives  them  a  sign  and  seal  of  their 
right  to  it?"  Is  this  right  a  valid  one,  only 
when  it  cannot  be  used  ?  and  does  it  grow 
weaker  and  weaker,  as  the  mind  increases 
in  capacity  to  comprehend  its  nature,  till  at 
the  point  of  mature  understanding,  the  right, 
with  the  favour  which  it  embraces,  vanishes 
into  nothing?  Shall  it  be  said  of  the  "little 
ones  of  the  Kingdom,  that  they  believe  in 
Christ,"  when  they  cannot  believe  at  all; 
and  shall  they  be  accounted  "  infidels  and  un- 
believers," when,  having  arrived  at  maturity, 
they  are  ready  to  declare  that  they  believe 
"  the  doctrine  contained  in  the  Old  and  New 


UNDERSTOOD  BY  BELIEVERS.  97 

Testament to  be  the  true  and  perfect 

doctrine  of  salvation?" 

The  church  does  indeed  make  a  difference 
between  those  who  profess,  and  whom  she 
considers  to  be  regenerated,  and  those  who 
have  not  attained  to  the  hope  of  so  divine  a 
blessing.  But  it  is  not  such  a  difference  as 
brands  the  latter  with  infidelity.  When  chil- 
dren are  presented  for  baptism,  the  questions 
propounded,  so  far  as  belief  is  concerned,  are 
adjusted  to  the  idea,  that  if  the  presenting 
parents  assent  to  the  perfection  of  the  Chris- 
tian doctrine  in  general,  and  to  the  doctrine 
of  original  sin  in  particular,  they  are  be- 
lievers ;  and  have  not  renounced  the  covenant. 
These  questions  can  be  affirmatively  an- 
swered with  a  good  conscience,  by  thousands 
who  have  no  reason  to  believe  that  they  have 
been  bom  again,  nay  they  would  do  violence 
to  their  consciences,  if  they  answered  them  in 
the  negative.  But  why,  if  these  questions 
furnish  no  test  of  belief,  and  if  after  they  have 
been  affirmatively  answered,  the  church  re- 
gards the  respondents  as  infidels  and  unbe- 
lievers still,  does  she  not,  or  rather,  why  did 
9 


98  WHAT  IS  TO  BE 

she  not  from  the  beginning,  address  the  pa- 
rents presenting  their  children  for  baptism,  as 
she  addresses  those  who  present  themselves 
for  that  holy  ordinance  ?  In  the  latter  case, 
faith,  as  an  appropriating  act,  is  supposed  to  be 
present;  and  because  this  is  supposed,  the 
candidate  is  required  to  declare  his  belief, 
that  Christ  "is  given  him  of  God  to  be 
his  Saviour — that  he  receives  by  this  faith 
remission  of  sins  in  his  blood ;  and  that  he  is 
made  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  a 
member  of  Jesus  Christ  and  his  church." 
He  who  can  believe  that  all  this  difference  is 
made,  without  any  reference  to  a  difference  in 
the  requirements  of  the  two  cases,  must  be  in 
the  use  of  some  mysterious  method  of  gather- 
ing meaning  from  words ;  or  must  conceive 
the  church  as  so  doatingly  fond  of  variety,  in 
the  mode  of  expressing  herself,  as  to  be  in 
perpetual  danger  of  being  misunderstood.  It 
were  better  to  acquit  the  church  of  this  bias 
towards  rhetorical  fancies,  and  to  consider 
her  as  intending  all  the  difference,  which  her 
carefully  chosen  language  implies.  It  will 
then  be  acknowledged,  that  she  does  not  re- 


UNDERSTOOD   BY    BELIEVERS.  99 

gard  as  indispensable  the  sa?ne  faith  in  the 
parent  presenting  a  child,  as  she  does  in  the 
aduh  presenting  himself  for  baptism. 

Still  she  addresses  the  parent  as  "beloved 
in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  And  why  should 
she  not?  Has  he  not  been  baptized  into  the 
faith  of  Christ?  Does  she  not  own  him  as  a 
member  of  the  chmxh  of  Christ,  which  is 
beloved  by  her  Lord.  The  apostles  address 
the  churches  by  every  endearing  and  gracious 
title ;  and  by  so  doing,  they  address  all  who 
are  incorporated  with  the  visible  body  in  the 
same  manner ;  though  many  of  them  are  no 
better  than  "  tares,"  whose  end  is  to  be  burn- 
ed. Acknowledged  relations  afford  a  better 
ground,  on  which  to  found  Christian  titles  and 
addresses,  than  professions  do.  Of  the  for- 
mer, we  can  know  all  that  we  need  to  know ; 
of  the  latter  we  can  know  but  little.  Even 
fruit  may  be  fair  to  look  upon,  which  yet  may 
be  rotten  at  the  core.  We  are  always  in 
danger,  when  we  affect  to  take  cognizance  of 
secret  things.  And  if  a  greater  guard  were 
set  against  confounding  the  things  of  the 
invisible,  with  those  of  the  visible  kingdom 


,  100  WHAT    IS   TO    BE 

of  God,  we  should  be  in  far  less  danger  of 
usurping  the  prerogatives  of  Him,  to  whom 
it  belongs  to  cast  out  whatever  shall  offend. 

Admitting  that  the  word  believing  ought 
to  be  understood  in  connection  with  the  sanc- 
tifying parent ;  and  even  admitting  it  to  be 
expressive  of  evangelical  faith,  it  would  not 
thence  follow,  that  the  right  of  the  child 
ought  to  be  ascribed  to  that  faith.  The  be- 
liever may  be  assumed  to  have  been  bap- 
tized. Suppose  however  he  had  not,  would 
faith  alone  entitle  to  the  privilege  in  question? 
I  once  heard  such  an  idea  suggested,  but  as 
I  never  expect  to  hear  it  again,  I  shall  be 
excused  from  attempting  to  expose  its  absur- 
dity. Let  it  be  supposed  then,  with  the  ex- 
ception alluded  to,  that  it  is  agreed  on  all 
hands,  that  the  covenant  relation  of  the  parent 
is  indispensable,  whatever  his  religious  cha- 
racter may  be,  is  it  not  safe  to  place  the  right 
upon  that  relation^  rather  than  upon  another 
thing,  which  is  the  great  matter  of  dispute  ? 
A  believer  is  supposed  to  be  in  covenant; 
and  therefore  we  may  consider  the  term  be- 
lieving, as  a  very  proper  one  to  be  used  in 


UNDERSTOOD  BY  BELIEVERS.  101 

connection  with  a  right,  founded  on  tliat  rela- 
tion. It  had  never  been  known  that  the  faith 
of  a  parent,  not  in  covenant,  had  entitled  his 
child  to  the  seal  of  the  covenant.  The  appli- 
cation of  the  seal,  where  the  only  thing  re- 
quired, was  the  covenant  relation  of  the 
parent,  had  been  according  to  the  unifoiTn 
practice  of  the  church  for  generations. 

I  conclude  this  chapter,  with  the  notice  of 
a  consideration  of  no  small  importance  in 
this  controversy.  Those  who  entered  the 
church  in  the  time  of  the  apostles,  were  con- 
verts from  the  Jews  who  had  been  cast  out,  or 
from  the  Gentiles.  They  joined  upon  a  con- 
fession of  their  faith.  No  question  respect- 
ing any  of  their  childy^en^  could  arise  like  the 
one  under  consideration ;  and  a  decision  upon 
any  of  them,  could  have  no  more  effect  in 
deciding  the  rights  of  a  child,  resulting  to  it 
from  the  baptism  of  its  parents,  in  their  in- 
fancy^ than  a  decision  upon  the  case  of  a  con- 
vert to  Judaism,  w^ould  have  upon  the  cove- 
nant rights  of  a  child,  bom  of  Jewish  parents. 
This  we  have  seen  to  be  just  nothing  at  all. 
The  apostles  were  a  generation  too  early  to 
9* 


102  WHAT    IS    TO    BE,    ETC. 

be  called  to  tlie  decision  of  ,  cases  in  the 
situation  of  those  contemplated  in  this  essay. 
Had  it  been  the  design  to  establish  any  new 
law,  in  the  place  of  that  which  had  been  in 
operation  from  the  beginning  in  relation  to 
children,  born  of  parents  who  had  themselves 
been  baptized  in  their  infancy,  the  case  would 
have  been  anticipated;  and  provision  would 
have  been  made  for  it,  by  a  positive  enact- 
ment, as  clear  and  unequivocal  as  that  which 
we  demand  from  the  Baptists,  for  the  repeal 
of  the  Abrahamic  covenant  itself.  But  no 
such  enactment  exists,  and  consequently  we 
are  left  to  make  application  of  the  original 
law,  to  successive  cases  as  they  come  under 
the  cognizance  of  the  church. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

OF    THE    BEARING    OF    THE    PROMISCUOUS    USE 

OF    THE    PASSOVER    ON    THE    PRESENT 

SUBJECT. 

There  is  no  argument  against  the  claims 
of  those  children,  whose  cause  this  little  book 
is  intended  to  plead,  that  appears  to  afford 
greater  satisfaction  to  those  who  use  it,  than 
the  one  attempted  to  be  drawn  from  the 
promiscuous  use  of  the  Passover  by  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Jewish  church.  It  is  everywhere 
employed  in  conversation,  and  the  brethren 
seem  to  regard  it  as  a  fortress,  within  which, 
when  a  lodgment  is  once  made,  they  are  as 
much  out  of  the  way  of  danger,  from  the  logi- 
cal or  theological  artillery  of  our  men,  as  they 
are  of  amioyance  from  the  cries  of  our  chil- 
dren. "  All  the  parents,"  says  no  less  a  man 
than  Dr.  Wardlaw,  "  who  had  their  children 
circumcised,  were  admitted  to  the  Passover, 
and  other  institutions  of  the  Jewish  church. 
If  therefore  the   alleged  parallehsm  in   the 


104  PROMISCUOUS    USE 

one  case,  justifies  the  admission  of  children  to 
baptism,  to  the  same  extent  to  which  they 
were  admitted  to  circmiicision,  it  must  equally 
justify  the  admission  of  their  parents  to  the 
Lord's  Supper,  and  all  the  institutions  of 
Christian  fellowship.  I  do  not  see  how  this 
inference  is  to  be  evaded."  In  these  obser- 
vations the  Doctor  does  not  evince  his  usual 
perspicacity. 

It  would  seem  to  be  obvious  in  contempla- 
tion of  the  penalty,  that  if  the  law  of  the  Pass- 
over is  to  extend  its  influence  into  the  new 
dispensation,  the  only  rule  that  can  be  drawn 
from  it,  is  applicable  not  to  the  reception,  but 
to  the  expulsion  of  members.  But  as  other 
use  is  assigned  to  be  made  of  it.  it  is  right 
that  the  further  reasoning  of  the  Doctor  should 
be  heard.  "It  will  not  do,"  he  says,  "to 
say  that  there  is  not  the  same  established 
parallelism,  between  the  Passover  and  the 
Lord's  Supper,  as  there  is  between  circumci- 
sion and  baptism.  For  supposing  this  to 
be  true,  my  argument  does  not  rest  on  any 
such  parallelism.  It  would  be  the  same, 
though  there  vrere  no  resemblance  between 


OF    THE    PASSOVER.  105 

the  two  former  institutions.  It  rests  simply 
on  the  fact  of  the  admission  of  the  ordinances, 
whatever  they  might  be,  which  formed  the 
outward  distinction  of  the  Jews,  as  the  pro- 
fessors of  faith  in  the  God  of  Abraham ; 
and  of  such  Gentile  proselytes,  as  adopted 
that  faith — the  admission  to  these  ordinances, 
of  all  parents  whose  children  were  admitted 
to  the  initiatory  rite  of  circumcision.  Let  an 
instance  be  pointed  out,  of  a  parent  whose 
child  was  admitted  to  circumcision,  while  he 
himself  was  not  to  all  the  ordinances  of  the 
Jew^ish  church.  If  no  such  instance  can  be 
produced,  let  the  parallelism  be  fairly  follow- 
ed on  both  sides.  Admit  to  the  ordinances 
for  adults,  all  the  parents  whose  infant  oiF- 
springyou  admit  to  the  ordinances  for  children. 
This  is  precisely  what  I  contend  for.  It  was 
what  was  actually  done  then ;  it  is  what  in 
my  judgment  ought  to  be  done  now." 

The  following  observations  will  illustrate 
in  part,  the  logical  strength  and  beauty  of 
these  sentences  ;  as  well  as  their  consistency 
with  sentiments  advanced  in  other  parts  of 
Dr.  Wardlaw's  work  on  Baptism: 


106  PROMISCUOUS    USE 

1.  The  right  to  partake  of  the  Passover  is 
constantly  spoken  of  as  if  it  were  something 
peculiar,  by  which  one  Jew  was  distinguished 
from  another,  whereas  the  doctor  very  well 
knows  it  was  common  to  them  all.  Nothing 
but  the  fact  of  participation  or  non-participa- 
tion, could  by  possibility  be  brought  to  bear 
upon  the  rights  of  children  to  the  initiatory 
ordinance.  If  a  person  who  was  not  labour- 
ing under  some  natural,  or  legal  disability, 
refused  to  partake  of  the  Passover,  whatever 
his  religious  or  moral  character  might  he,  he 
was  to  be  cut  off  from  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord — condemned,  as  Calmet  thinks,  to  death 
— or  as  others  suppose,  only  excommunicated. 
Following  "the  parallelism,"  all  who  have 
been  baptized,  whatever  their  moral  or  religi- 
ous character  may  be,  ought  to  partake  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,  or  be  cut  off  from  the  congre- 
gation of  the  Lord.  But  Dr.  Wardlaw's  idea 
of  the  relation  of  the  baptized  to  the  church, 
they  being  not  properly  members,  but  only 
"  disciples  under  training,"  leads  him  to  reject 
the  idea  of  their  being  cut  off  from  the  church. 
Were  he  to  abandon  this  idea,  and   admit 


OP   THE   PASSOVER.  lOt 

what  the  "  pai'allehsm"  demands,  he  would 
still  have  an  important  explanation  to  make. 
For  while  a  Jew  would  not,  I  could  not  ad- 
mit to  privileges  an  excommunicated  person. 
Dr.  Wardlaw  loould,  '•  I  do  not  say,"  says 
he,  "that  I  would  not  baptize  the  child  of 
any  man  who  is  not  a  member  of  a  chwrch ; 
or  who  does  not  immediately  join  oneP 
''  Let  the  parallelism  be  fairly  followed  on  both 
sides,"  says  the  doctor.  What  beautiful  con- 
sistencies result  from  the  process  ! 

2.  Would  not  one  suppose  from  the  lan- 
guage employed  in  the  passage  under  re- 
view, that  the  right  of  the  child  to  circum- 
cision, grew  out  of  the  right  of  the  parent 
to  partake  of  the  Passover  ?  And  yet  every 
body  knows,  that  from  the  circumcision 
of  the  Jew,  resulted  both  his  right  to  the 
Passover,  and  his  right  to  present  his  child 
for  the  initiatory  ordinance.  They  were  con- 
current rights,  proceeding  from  a  common 
origin.  I  do  not  recollect  to  have  seen  the 
rule  of  logic,  which  authorizes  a  reasoner  to 
assume  that  one  of  these  rights  resulted  from 
the  other.     If  there  be  such  a  rule,  it  must  be 


108  PROMISCUOUS    USE 

^  good  one,  and  of  course  work  both  ways. 
After  giving  to  Dr.  Wardlaw  the  privilege  of 
founding  the  right  to  present  a  child  for  cir- 
cumcision, upon  the  right  to  partake  the  Pass- 
over, it  cannot  refuse  to  me,  the  privilege  of 
founding  the  right  to  partake  of  the  Passover^ 
upon  the  right  to  present  a  child  for  circum- 
cision. But  I  could  adopt  no  course  of  rea- 
soning from  premises  acquired  in  this  way, 
which  the  doctor  would  not  brand  with  the 
mark  of  absurdity  ;  and  I  should  be  particu- 
larly uiureasonable  to  think  of  asking  more, 
than  the  loan  of  the  remark  that  he  would 
make  on  my  logic,  to  be  used  as  a  commenta- 
ry upon  that  which  he  has  given  as  his  own. 
If  it  was  intended  that  the  reader  should  un- 
derstand, that  the  right  to  present  a  child  for 
circumcision,  resulted  from  the  right  to  par- 
take of  the  Passover;  a  more  poorly  dis- 
guised assumption  of  the  very  thing  to  be 
proved,  has  seldom  been  presented  to  a  think- 
ing community.  If  such  was  not  the  intention 
what  could  have  induced  that  vicious  and 
perverted  mode  of  speaking  of  rights,  which 
goes  so  far  to  confound  the  relations,  and  de- 


OF    THE    PASSOVER.  109 

pendencies  established  by  God,  and  does  so 
much  to  keep  out  of  sight  the  very  fact  upon 
which  the  argument  is  professedly  founded? 
3.  The  fact  on  w^hich  the  Doctor  founds  his 
argument  is,  that  all  parents  who  had  a  right 
to  present  their  children  for  the  ordinance  of 
circumcision,  were  admitted  to  the  Passover. 
This  is  but  a  partial  statement.  Why  does 
he  not  give  us  the  whole  fact  1  The  whole 
fact  was,  that  all  who  presented  their  children, 
partook  of  the  Passover,  and  all  who  partook 
of  the  Passover,  if  they  had  children,  pre- 
sented them.  The  rights  were  co-extensive, 
and  they  were  universal,  and  the  practice 
was  in  conformity  with  the  rights.  Will  Dr. 
Wardlaw  still  contend,  that  ''  what  was  done 
then,  should  be  done  noio  ?"  He  may  if  he 
choose  it.  If  he  attempt  to  limit  the  conclu- 
sion to  what  he  contemplates  in  his  argmnent, 
he  will  certainly  have  to  go  beyond  the  fact, 
for  a  reason  to  justify  his  limitation.  Will  he 
appeal  to  the  law  in  the  case  ?  I  doubt  not 
he  will  find  the  attempt  to  deduce  special 
disabilities  from  a  law,  establishing  common 
and  universal  rights,  to  be  among  the  most 
10 


110  PROMISCUOUS    USE 

Herculean  of  all  the  logical  labours  in  which 
he  has  ever  yet  been  engaged. 

Further,  if  the  conclusion  aimed  at,  is 
to  be  estabhshed  from  the  "  fact"  without  the 
"  parallelism,"  it  can  only  be  upon  the  princi- 
ple, that  the  constitution  of  the  church,  under 
the  New  Dispensation,  is  so  far  identical  with 
that  under  the  Old,  that  whatever  was  the 
rule  in  relation  to  the  sacraments  under  the 
one^  must  be  the  rule  under  the  other.  A 
change  of  the  law  involves  a  change  of  prac- 
tice. But  Dr.  Wardlaw  takes  care  to  con- 
tradict this  principle,  upon  which  alone  he 
can  establish  the  conclusion,  which  he  has  so 
much  at  heart,  by  saying,  that  the  "  constitu- 
tion (of  the  church)  was  to  be  remodelled " 
under  the  New  Dispensation. 

Now  he  is  both  right  and  lorong,  in  the 
principle  involved  in  the  statement  of  his  ar- 
gument, and  in  the  passage  in  which  he  con- 
tradicts it.  He  is  right  in  supposing  the  con- 
stitution to  remain  unchanged  ;  and  if  he  be 
allowed  to  use  the  word  "  constitution,"  in 
an  extended  and  loose  sense,  he  is  right  in 
saying  that  it  has  been  "  remodelled."     But 


OF    THE    PASSOVER.  Ill 

he  is  wrong,  egregiously  wrong,  in  placing 
change  where  there  is  permanency,  and  per- 
manency where  there  is  change.  The  only 
constitution  of  the  church  which  affects  the 
rights  of  children,  is  the  Abrahamic  covenant. 
I  deny  that  this  has  been  remodelled,  in  any 
thing  to  impair  those  rights  ;  and  so  does 
Dr.  Wardlaw,  when  arguing  with  the  baptists. 
The  remodelhng  that  has  taken  place,  respects 
the  ordinance  for  adults.  And  I  hope  to  show 
before  I  have  done,  that  the  law  of  the  Pass- 
over is  so  unlike  the  law  of  the  Supper,  that 
it  is  entitled  to  no  consideration  whatever,  in 
determining  who  are  the  proper  subjects  of 
either  of  the  Christian  ordinances. 

4.  In  dispensing  with  the  parallelism  be- 
tween the  Passover  and  the  Lord's  Supper, 
Dr.  Wardlaw  does  not  dispense  with  '•  paral- 
lelisms" in  his  reasoning.  He  turns  the  lines 
another  way,  running  them  back,  professedly 
upon  the  relations  existing  between  the  Pass- 
over and  circumcision,  between  the  Lord's 
Sapper  and  baptism. 

If  the  reader  will  indulge  me  with  a  sort 
of  mathematical  illustration,  I  promise  to  pass 


112  PROMISCUOUS    USE 

by  the  minute  steps  usually  required  for  ma- 
thematical exactness ;  and  then  if  the  illus- 
tratiorij  (though  none  the  less  a  demonstration 
of  the  weakness  of  a  strong  man's  argument) 
prove  to  be  either  dry  or  tedious,  the  fault 
will  lie  not  in  the  plan,  but  in  the  execution. 

Circumcision  and  Baptism  exactly  coincid- 
ing in  signification  and  design,  they  occupy 
the  same  place — they  rest  upon  a  single 
point :  let  this  point  be  represented  by  B. 
The  Passover  and  the  Supper,  by  supposi- 
tion and  in  fact,  not  having  the  same  coinci- 
dence in  signification  and  design,  that  exists  be- 
tween the  other  two  ordinances,  are  different, 
the  one  from  the  other,  and  occupy  different 
places,  —  they  rest  upon  different  points. 
Let  these  be  represented  by  P,  and  S.  Now 
from  the  point  P,  let  a  line  be  drawn  connect- 
ing P  and  B,  and  from  the  point  S,  let  a  line 
be  drawn,  parallel  with  the  line  P,  B,  "  let 
the  parallelism  be  fairly  followed,"  I  declare 
that  the  line  S,  though  infinitely  extended,  will 
not  touch  the  point  B,  because,  (fee.  It  will 
keep  as  clear  of  it,  as  Dr.  Wardlaw's  argu- 
ment does  of  the  point  at  which  he  aims  in 


OF    THE    PASSOVER.  113 

his  second  parallel ;  and  will  push  right  on, 
carrying  the  Doctor's  argument,  conclusion 
and  all  along  with  it,  into  blank  infinity ; 
whither,  as  I  have  neither  the  inclination 
nor  the  ability  to  follow,  I  leave  it  to  pursue 
its  interminable  and  harmless  course. 

What  Dr.  Wardlaw  says  on  another  page, 
about  the  "  restriction"  under  tlie  New  Testa- 
ment, of  the  principle  he  has  assumed,  will  in 
fact,  if  not  in  form,  receive  all  the  considera- 
tion which  it  deserves,  in  the  following  gene- 
ral argument,  in  answer  to  the  main  objection. 

If  the  objection  to  the  doctrine  of  these 
chapters,  which  is  urged  from  the  fact,  that 
all  parents  who  had  a  right  to  present  their 
children  for  the  ordinance  of  circumcision^ 
were  admitted  to  the  Passover,  have  any  force, 
it  must  depend  upon  the  establishment  of  two 
positions.  1.  That  the  Lord's  Supper  has 
succeeded  the  Passover,  on  the  same  princi'- 
pie  as  that  upon  which  "  baptism  has  come 
in  the  place  of  circumcision."  And  2.  the 
signification  of  the  ordinances  must  in  all  re- 
spects be  so  much  the  same,  that  no  reason 
could  exist  for  an  indiscriminate  participation 
10* 


114  PROMISCUOUS    USE 

of  the  Passover,  which  does  not  exist  for  an 
equally  indiscriminate  use  of  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per. How  the  truth  stands  in  both  these  re- 
spects, it  is  worthy  of  our  profoundest  vene- 
ration for  the  institutions  of  God  to  inquire. 

1.  For  the  first, — All  Pedo-baptists  ground 
the  doctrine  of  infant  chiu-ch  membership 
upon  the  Abrahamic  covenant;  the  perpe- 
tuity of  which  they  establish,  by  incontrover- 
tible testimonies  from  the  word.  And  when 
they  are  charged  by  the  opposers  of  the  doc- 
trine, with  clinging  to  an  institution  of  an 
abolished  system,  they  repel  the  imputation 
by  the  very  considerations  which  put  to  rout 
the  objection  before  us.  They  say  that  they 
have  nothing  to  do  with  the  institutions  of 
Moses, ' —  that  these  institutions  were  ordain- 
ed to  answer  temporary  purposes,  until  the 
establishment  of  a  better  economy  under 
the  Messiah,  —  that  they  have  decayed,  wax- 
ed old,  and  have  vanished  away.  They  say 
too,  and  they  say  rightly,  that  the  abolishing 
of  all  this,  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  Abra- 
hamic covenant,  —  That  had  its  own  inde- 
pendent existence  as  the  ctmstitution  of  the 


OF   THE    PASSOVER.  115 

church's  visible  organization,  for  centuries  be- 
fore Moses  w^as  born ;  and  that  as  it  had 
effect  before^  so  it  has  effect  after  the  exist- 
ence of  the  institutions  of  the  Jevv^ish  law- 
giver. But  in  the  objection  before  us,  there 
is  a  pious  raking  among  the  dust  and  frag- 
ments of  a  ruined  fabric,  for  something  v^ith 
which  to  adorn  the  temple,  in  its  new  form  of 
beauty  and  magnificence.  Christ  did  not 
establish  infant  church-membership,  he  found 
it ;  and  because  he  did  not  abolish  it,  it  re- 
mains ;  and  must  be  governed  by  those  laws, 
which  regulated  it  in  its  original  establishment* 
The  Passover  ceased  by  its  own  limitation 
as  a  part  of  a  temporary  system.  With  it 
passed  away  the  laws  by  which  it  was  regu* 
lated  ;  and  now  we  have  nothing  more  to  do 
with  it  or  tliem^  than  we  have  with  the  sprink- 
ling of  blood,  or  with  the  water  of  jealousy. 
If  any  thing  is  to  take  its  place  in  the  church 
under  the  new  economy,  it  must  be  an  origin- 
al institution,  deriving  neither  authority,  nor 
character,  from  its  obsolete  predecessor.  It 
must  be  governed  by  its  oion  laws  exclu- 
sively.    Such  an  institution  is  the  Holy  Sup- 


116  PROMISCUOUS    USE 

per  of  our  Lord.  And  lie  who  should  en- 
gage himself  in  efforts,  to  discover  the  laws 
by  which  it  is  to  be  governedj  from  the  Old 
Testament,  would  be  about  as  well  employ- 
ed, as  if  he  were  looking  there  for  the  history 
of  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles. 

2.  Let  us  see  whether  the  significancy  of 
the  ordinances,  is  in  all  respects  so  much  the 
same,  that  no  reason  existed  for  an  indiscri- 
minate participation  of  the  Passover,  which 
does  not  exist  for  an  equally  indiscriminate 
use  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

All  are  agreed  as  to  the  exalted  spiritual 
signification  of  the  Holy  Supper  of  our  Lord. 
The  knowledge,  faith,  and  affection  of  a  re- 
generated soul,  are  all  included  in  a  worthy 
participation.  He  approaches  it  unworthily, 
who  does  so  without  examining  whether  he 
be  in  the  faith ;  he  partakes  of  it  unworthily, 
who  does  not  discern  the  Lord's  body. 

But  is  not  Christ  called  ''  our  Passover^^^ 
and  does  not  this  exalt  the  Jewish  Passover 
into  a  sacrament,  as  significant  of  the  death 
of  Christ,  as  the  Supper  itself?  undoubtedly 
it  does.     Nor  do  we  doubt  that  the  pious 


OP   THE    PASSOVER.  117 

sons  of  Abraham,  saw  through  it  the  sacrifice 
of  the  Lamb  of  God,  and  rejoiced  in  the  hope 
which  that  vision  inspired.  But  while  the 
pious  used  it  in  tliis  mamier,  and  were  re- 
freshed by  it,  is  it  to  be  supposed  for  a  mo- 
ment, that  there  were  no  other  associations, 
upon  which  could  be  grounded  a  command 
for  an  indiscriminate  participation  by  the  na- 
tion ?  There  were  such  associations  ;  while 
to  the  Lord's  Supper  none  such  belong.  Let 
any  one  read  the  12th  chapter  of  Exodus,  and 
he  will  soon  discover  that  we  have  not  spoken 
without  authority.  ''  And  ye  shall  observe 
the  feast  of  unleavened  bread,  for  in  this  self 
same  day  have  I  brought  your  armies  out  of 
the  land  of  Egypt ;  therefore  shall  ye  observe 
this  day  in  your  generations,  by  an  ordinance 
forever."  ..."  And  it  shall  come  to  pass, 
when  your  children  shall  say  imto  you  what 
mean  ye  by  this  service?  that  ye  shall  say  it 
is  the  sacrifice  of  the  Lord's  Passover ;  when 
he  passed  over  the  houses  of  the  children  of 
Israel  in  Egypt,  when  he  smote  the  Egyp- 
tians, and  delivered  our  houses."  This  is  the 
account  that  was  to  be  given  to  the  multitude, 


118  PROMISCUOUS   USE 

whose  only  understanding  of  it  would  be  that 
which  the  words  hterally  convey.  They 
were  to  consider  the  service  as  commemora- 
tive of  a  national  deliverance.  That  deliver- 
ance it  is  true  had  a  t3rpical  signification, 
more  or  less  understood  by  the  pious.  But 
of  the  feast,  by  which  it  was  commemorated, 
and  which  was  to  be  indiscriminately  observ- 
ed, the  people  were  told  no  more  about  it, 
than  they  could  understand.  So  far  the 
mere  youth  as  well  as  the  more  mature,  could 
consistently  keep  the  Passover  ;  and  it  was 
an  offence  which  God  would  punish,  if  they 
refused.  From  the  reason  given  for  observ- 
ing the  day,  and  from  the  character  of  those 
who  were  required  to  participate  in  the  ser- 
vices, it  would  necessarily  result,  that  the  na- 
tional jubilee  of  the  Passover,  would  present 
a  very  diiferent  scene  from  that  presented  by 
our  celebration  of  the  Holy  Supper.  Some 
there  would  be,  whose  minds,  intent  upon  the 
mysteries  of  God's  providence  and  grace, 
would  see  from  afar  the  coming  of  the  Just 
One  ]  while  they  rejoiced  in  the  salvation 
which  he  would  procure.    Others  would  be 


OF    THE    PASSOVER.  119 

wholly  occupied  with  the  wonderful  histori- 
cal recollections  of  the  nation,  —  the  night  of 
terror  to  the  Egyptians,  and  of  deliverence  to 
Israel,  —  the  passage  of  the  sea,  —  and  in 
subsequent  ages,  the  countless  instances  of 
the  out-stretched  arm  of  Jehovah,  in  behalf  of 
his  chosen.  The  youth  would  indulge  in  all 
those  sallies,  which  are  the  joint  production 
of  undisciplined  feelings,  and  the  inspirations 
of  a  national  Jubilee.  Let  no  one  complain 
of  this.  It  was  the  natural  and  necessary  result 
of  the  law  of  the  Passover ;  and  when  an  aspect 
like  this  shall  be  given  to  our  communion,'  and 
a  command  given  for  its  promiscuous  observ- 
ance, and  for  a  reason  as  purely  national  as  that 
which  was  given  for  the  observance  of  the 
Passover,  it  will  be  time  enough  to  press  us 
with  the  objection  we  are  considering,  — till 
then,  it  will  remain  without  the  shadow  of  a 
reason  to  give  it  weight.  There  is  nothing 
in  the  institution  of  the  Supper,  at  all  answer- 
able to  that  very  peculiarity  in  the  Passover, 
upon  which  its  promiscuous  observation  was 
enjoined.  And  would  any  have  us  now,  to 
deprive  children  of  their  covenanted  privi- 


120  PROMISCUOUS    USE 

leges,  because  their  parents  have  not  done 
that,  the  very  law  for  which  is  abolished  — 
which  they  cannot  do — and  for  the  very  at- 
tempt to  do  which,  on  the  principle  upon 
which  it  was  formerly  enjoined,  we  should 
drive  them  from  the  church  ? 

Since  then  it  is  manifest,  that  the  Lord's 
Supper  does  not  take  the  place  of  the  Pass- 
over, by  the  operation  of  the  law  of  that  insti» 
tution,  which  is  utterly  abolished  ;  but  is  an 
entirely  new  and  independent  ordinance,  to  be 
regulated  by  its  own  laws ;  and  since  the  laws 
of  the  two  institutions  are  so  different,  that  a 
promiscuous  use  of  the  one  is  enjoined,  on 
national  principles,  and  a  similar  use  of  the 
other  is  positively  unlawful,  on  spiritual  prin- 
ciples ;  and  since  nothing  of  this  is  true  with 
respect  to  baptism  and  circumcision,  the  in- 
stitution of  the  one  being  the  warrant  for  the 
other,  and  the  same  law  governing  both ;  we 
wonder  if  there  are  any  who  can  see  how  Dr. 
Wardlaw's  inference  can  be  evaded,  though 
he  could  not '?  The  question  has  been  asked 
in  reference  to  our  doctrine,  "  is  not  the  ana- 
logy between  the  former  and  the  present  dis- 


OF    THE    PASSOVER.  121 

pensation  too  rigorously  carried  out  ?"  It  is 
added  "  the  former  was  comparatively  carnal, 
the  present  spiritual.  The  church  was  then 
a  theocracy,  and  in  her  institutions,  ci^'il  and 
religious  matters  were  blended.  The  cove- 
nant with  Abraham  laid  a  basis  for  spiritual 
blessings,  as  well  as  for  ecclesiastical  privi- 
leges. Circumcision  was  a  seal  of  the  righte- 
ousness of  faith."  That  as  sin  of  the  kind 
has  been  committed,  is  past  all  dispute.  But 
who,  in  the  name  of  consistency,  we  ask,  are 
guilty  of  it  1  They  who  ivill  confound  all 
distinction  between  the  Passover  and  the 
Supper — between  things  national  and  things 
spiritual ;  or  we,  who  place  our  defence,  in 
arresting  that  very  analogy,  which  is  adopted^ 
and  carried  to  the  height  of  extravagance,  in 
the  objection  before  us  7     Let  all  men  judge. 


11 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE    PRACTICAL  RESULT. 

The  last  objection  is,  that  the  doctrine  at- 
tempted to  be  estabhshed,  leads  to  the  most 
lamentable  laxness  in  the  government  and 
discipline  of  the  church.  In  answer  to  this 
objection,  I  offer  the  following  considerations : 

1.  If  it  is  to  be  miderstood,  that  an  objec- 
tion to  any  truth,  doctrine  or  ordinance,  from 
its  supposed  tendency  to  practical  evil,  is  to 
invalidate  the  direct  testimony  in  favour  of 
such  truth,  doctrine  or  ordinance,  I  utterly 
deny  the  right  to  make  it.  Whatever  is  ad- 
vanced upon  the  divine  testimony  ;  if  it  can 
be  sustained  by  such  testimony,  is  not  the  less 
true,  nor  sacred,  on  account  of  any  objections 
which  we  may  have  to  make  against  it.  Ob- 
serve where  the  principle  of  this  objection 
leads.  The  Universalist  professes  to  re- 
gard it  as  utterly  repugnant  to  all  ideas  of 
the  goodness  of  God,  that  smners  should  be 
eternally  punished ;  and  therefore  he  concludes 


THE  PRACTICAL  RESULT.       123 

that  the  doctrine  of  eternal  punishment  can- 
not be  true.  The  Armenian  professes  to 
beheve,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  decrees 
is  utterly  subversive  of  all  practical  holiness  ; 
and  therefore  he  concludes  that  the  doctrine 
of  the  decrees  is  not  true.  The  Baptist  con- 
siders it  as  a  piece  of  solemn  mockery,  de- 
structive of  the  purity  of  the  church,  to  bap- 
tize an  infant,  who  has  no  knov^ledge  of  a 
religious  ordinance  :  and  therefore  he  rejects 
the  doctrine  of  infant  baptism.  Others  regard 
the  baptism  of  children  whose  parents  are 
not  real  believers,  or  such  at  least  by  confes- 
sion, as  tending  to  lamentable  laxness  in  the 
discipline  of  the  house  of  God  ;  and  therefore 
they  rely  upon  their  objections,  as  a  proof 
that  what  we  contend  for  cannot  be  true. 
Pray  what  is  the  difference  in  the  principle  of 
these  objections  ?  It  were  idle  to  talk  of 
any.  We  must  go  back  to  the  law  and  the 
testimony  ;  if  here  the  matter  be  confirmed, 
the  cognizance  of  consequences  belongs  not 
to  us.  If  there  be  any  evil  in  the  case  be- 
fore us,  it  is  inseparable  from  the  transmis- 
sion of  rehgious  privileges  by  natural  gene- 


124      THE  PRACTICAL  RESULT. 

ration  ;  but  if  God  saw  none  in  this,  not  even 
in  the  holy  priesthood,  nothing  better  becomes 
us  than  to  say,  "  even  so,"  and  then  close  our 
mouths  in  silence.     But — 

2.  We  deny  that  the  rejection  of  infants, 
by  refusing  them  baptism,  belongs  to  the 
discipline  of  the  church,  in  the  common  accep- 
tation of  that  term.  Discipline  has  to  do  with 
moral  agents,  and  their  actions  as  such. 
Casting  out  those  who  have  no  moral  respon- 
sibilities is  a  strange  way  of  punishing  the 
guilty.  Still  it  is  called  disciplining  the  delin- 
quent parents.  How  is  this  ?  Here  is  a  vast 
number  of  members  of  the  church,  who  are 
deemed  to  have  forfeited-  their  privileges. 
Are  they  tried,  and  condemned  for  their  ill 
deserts,  in  compliance  with  the  constitution 
of  the  church,  which  declares  that  they  are 
"subject  to  its  government  and  discipline?'' 
No.  Are  charges  preferred  against  them? 
No.  Are  they  so  much  as  cited  to  appear 
before  the  proper  ecclesiastical  tribunals? 
Not  at  all.  They  are  left  in  the  church  just 
where  they  were — not  a  personal  right  is 
denied  them.     If  they  happen  to  be  without 


THE  PRACTICAL  RESULT.       125 

children,  they  pass  on  without  notice  to  the 
end  of  hfe.  If  they  become  to  be  parents, 
and  do  not  show  regard  enough  for  the  in- 
stitutions of  rehgion,  to  wish  to  have  their 
childi-en  received  into  the  church  of  God, 
then  too,  they  escape  the  animadversions  of 
ecclesiastical  authority.  But  let  them  pre- 
sume to  present  their  offspring  before  the 
Lord,  to  receive  the  token  of  his  favour,  and 
forthwith  they  are  told  that  they  are  virtually 
excommunicated.  Nay,  that  they  have  ex- 
communicated themselves  !  The  church  in 
her  zeal  to  discharge  with  fidelity  the  sacred 
trust  committed  to  her  by  her  Lord,  resolves 
that  those  who  ought  to  be  disciplined,  are 
disciplined ;  and  having  committed  the  ad- 
ministration  of  the  laws  for  the  punishment  of 
the  guilty,  to  the  guilty  themselves,  she  gives 
them  notice  of  the  fact,  as  soon  as  they  be- 
come parents,  and  offer  to  do  their  duty  to 
their  children.  This  done,  she  cries  out, 
"  Come,  see  my  zeal  for  the  Lord."  Let  the 
parent  mourn  that  a  man  child  is  born  into 
the  world ;  for  now  he  is  cut  off  from  the 
congregation  of  the  Lord.  He  obtains  a 
11* 


126      THE  PRACTICAL  RESULT. 

new  power  of  self-condemnation,  by  the  joint 
action  of  God's  blessing  on  his  house,  and  his 
own  desire  to  acknowledge  it. 

Or  take  it  the  other  way,  and  call  it  the 
discipline  of  the  church.  Why  should  she 
discipline  a  parent,  where  she  thinks  of 
nothing  of  the  kind,  towards  one  who  has  no 
children,  to  present  for  her  prayers,  and  for 
the  blessing  of  Him  who  said,  "  Suffer  little 
children  to  come  unto  me  ?"  Let  those 
whom  it  may  concern,  call  this  consistency  if 
they  please.  They  will  have  no  ingenuity  to 
spare  in  its  vindication.  But  how  is  the 
thing  we  speak  of  discipline  ?  The  church, 
though  she  says  in  effect,  that  something  has 
been  done,  has  done  nothmg  with  the  delin- 
quent.  .  She  has  refused  baptism  to  one,  born 
within  her  enclosure,  and  by  so  doing  may 
have  thrust  some  Josiah,  some  heir  of  glory, 
from  her  bosom.  The  most  amiable  way  as 
to  the  manner,  though  in  reference  to  sound 
principles  of  government,  decidedly  the  worst, 
in  which  I  recollect  to  have  heard  the  busi- 
ness represented,  proceeds  somewhat  in  this 
way.     "  The  delinquent,  it  is  true,  has  not 


THE  PRACTICAL  RESULT.      127 

heen  formally  disciplined ;  but  when  he  comes 
to  ask  iox  peculiar  privileges  from  the  church, 
the  occasion  is  a  very  proper  one,  on  w^hich 
to  remind  him  of  his  failures  in  duty,  and  to 
let  him  know  that  he  has  forfeited  those 
privileges,  which  he  might  otherwise  have 
enjoyed." 

Not  to  insist  upon  the  principles,  which  we 
thinlv  we  have  fully  established,  that  the  privi- 
lege solicited,  is  not  the  parentis  privilege 
but  the  chilcTs  ;  we  ask,  what  is  there  pecu- 
liar in  it?  It  is  the  common  privilege  of  all 
the  children  of  the  church  ;  one  to  which  he 
was  admitted,  when  he  was  no  better  than  the 
child  he  offers  ;  and  in  the  undisputed  pos- 
session of  which  he  had  been  living  up  to 
the  very  hour.  It  may  be  well  too,  to  glance 
at  the  peculiar  suitableness  of  the  occasion 
for  the  manifestation  of  peculiar  zeal  for  the 
honour  of  our  holy  religion.  The  complaint 
is,  that  the  man  has  entirely  neglected  the 
duties  to  which  he  is  bound,  as  a  baptized 
member  of  the  church — "that  he  has  done  the 
things  that  he  ought  not  to  have  done,  and 
left  undone  the  things  that  he  ought  to  have 


128  THE    PRACTICAL   RESUL    . 

done."  All  the  time,  however,  he  passed 
without  rebuke.  Now  he  comes  forward  in 
his  first  motion,  that  evinces  some  degree  of 
regard  for  the  institutions  of  God's  house,  and 
on  the  occasion  of  this  his  only  act  of  obe- 
dience, he  is  thrust  aside,  and  told  that  he 
has  no  part  nor  lot  in  the  matter.  How  the 
idea  of  the  peculiar  suitableness  of  this  act 
to  the  occasion^  strikes  other  minds,  we  can- 
not tell ;  for  ourselves,  we  cannot  but  regai'd 
the  whole  thing,  as  entirely  indefensible  upon 
any  principle,  that  ought  to  be  allowed  to  have 
influence  in  the  government  of  the  house  of 
Ood.  It  is  not  discipline  ;  it  is  a  wrong 
against  right,  and  a  turning  of  an  occasion  of 
joy  into  one  of  rebuke,  that  withers  hope  in 
the  bud  of  its  promise. 

Discipline !  what  if  some  brother,  who  dif- 
fers from  us  on  this  subject,  should  prove  to 
be  remiss  in  duty,  (pardon  the  supposition)  and 
Avhat  if  when  about  to  proceed  to  the  perform- 
ance of  some  act,  enjoined  upon  him  by  the 
Master,  he  should  be  thrust  back  by  the 
Classis,  with  this  amiouncement ;  you  are 
disciphned — you  have  deposed  yourself — or, 


THE  PRACTICAL  RESULT.       129 

the  Classis  has  deposed  you  ;  not  indeed  on 
the  ordinary  Avay  of  trial,  but  by  virtue  of 
certain  occult  prerogatives,  which  sub-selentioj 
accomplish  their  work  without  the  aid  of 
those  perplexing  technicalities,  which  are  al- 
most sm-e  to  work  the  other  way,  whatever 
may  be  the  justice  of  the  case.  What  amaze- 
ment would  take  hold  upon  the  delinquent ! 
yea  "  what  indignation  !"  But,  it  is  only  a 
layman^  that  is  involved  in  the  other  case. 

Lastly,  we  deny  the  consequences  which 
are  charged  upon  our  principles.  It  would 
seem  that  the  most  effectual  way  to  maintain 
the  government  and  discipline  of  the  church, 
is  to  cast  out  the  unoffending  children,  while 
the  offending  parents  are  retained  in  their 
places ;  miless,  perchance,  they  discipline 
themselves,  or  the  minister  and  consistory  do 
it,  in  a  way  that  admits  of  no  one's  knowing 
it;  no,  not  even  themselves,  till  a  child  is 
horn.  But  this  looks  so  much  like  no  govern- 
ment at  all,  that  we  think  we  can  show  "  a 
more  excellent  way."     To  this  way  belongs 

The  faithful  preaching  of  the  Gospel^  in 
the  clearness  and    fulness  of  its   doctrinal 


130      THE  PRACTICAL  RESULT. 

principles — in  its  adaptation  to  the  condition 
of  a  lost  world,  and  in  the  application  of  it  to  the 
hearts  and  consciences  of  all,  by  the  most  direct 
and  pungent  appeals.    To  this  way  belongs — 

The  utmost  care  and  faithfulness,  in  the 
reception  of  members  to  the  communion  of  the 
church  ;  using  all  proper  means,  to  ascertain 
the  amount  of  their  knowledge,  and  the  de- 
gree of  influence  which  the  truth  exerts  upon 
their  hearts — letting  them  understand,  that 
**  that  heavenly  meat  and  drink  is  ordained 
only  for  the  faithful" — that  while  children  are 
baptized  "  by  virtue  of  the  covenant,"  without 
any  idea  that  they  profess  faith,  or  are  capa- 
ble of  it,  the  Holy  Supper  is  provided  for 
those  who  can  "  discern  the  Lord's  body," 
and  feed  by  faith  upon  him.  To  this  more 
excellent  way  belongs — 

A  most  faithful  watch  over  the  lives  of  the 
communicating  members.  They  should  be 
animated  to  all  holy  living  ;  and  deterred 
from  running  into  forbidden  paths,  by  the 
certainty  of  ecclesiastical  censure  in  case  of 
delinquency. 

It  will  hardly  be  denied,  that  where  these 


THE  PRACTICAL  RESULT.       131 

things  are  faithfully  attended  to,  the  church 
will  exhibit  a  fair  specimen  of  purity  and 
order.  Neither  do  we  think  it  can  be  denied, 
that  a  minister  acting  on  the  principles  of  this 
essay,  will  find  himself  entirely  free,  in  a 
course  of  the  strictest  fidelity,  in  relation  to 
each,  and  all  of  these  things.  Should  any  choose 
to  refer  us  to  congregations,  where  in  con- 
nection with  what  is  improperly  called  the  lax 
plan  of  baptism ;  the  whole  system  of  discip- 
line has  fallen  into  decay ;  we  will  respond  to 
their  moimiing  by  our  own  lamentations.  But 
we  hope  they  will  not  refuse  to  lament,  while 
we  mourn  over  large  districts  of  the  church, 
in  which  the  other  plan  of  baptism  has  been 
adopted ;  where  whole  armies  have  been  ad- 
mitted to  the  communion,  with  scarcely  any 
knowledge  of  the  first  principles  of  the  ora- 
cles of  God,  or  any  satisfactory  evidence  of 
being  bom  again.  Where  the  Table  of  the 
Lord  is  deserted  by  hundreds,  who  had  pledg- 
ed themselves  to  be  fomid  there ;  and  who 
are  no  more  looked  after,  than  if  discipline 
were  a  mere  sound  without  meaning;  and 
where  the  pious  that  remain,  are  in  sackcloth, 


132      THE  PRACTICAL  RESULT. 

for  the  desolations  of  Zion.      Some  of  the 
goodhest  specimens  of  purity  and  order,  are 
at  this  very  day  to  be  foimd  in  those  churches 
in  which  the  principles  we  advocate,  have 
been  adopted  in  practice.     We  have  seen  too, 
in  former  days,  exemplifications  of  the  same 
thing,  which  are  cheering  in  the  very  recollec- 
tion.    We  feel  it  the  more,  as  we  converse 
with  the  lingering  remains  of  the  worthies  of 
those  times,  in  which  not  the  side  which  the 
minister  might  take  on  the  question  before 
us,  but  the  holy  and  faithful  spirit  of  his 
ministrations,  was  looked  to,  under  the  bless- 
ing of  God,  for  the  promotion,  and  maintain- 
ance  of  the  order,  the   spirituality,  and  the 
glory  of  the  church.     It  is  in  this  way,  that 
the  church  is  to  realize  the  superior  spiritu- 
ality, of  which  one  speaks,  as  promised  to  the 
church  under  the  New  Dispensation;  and 
not  from  any  curtailment  by  us,  of  the  privi- 
leges of  the  covenant  with  her  God.     The 
spirits  administration^  not  ours,  will   make 
her  a  praise  in  the  earth.     We  may  cast  the 
children  of  the  covenant  out  of  the  church, 
she  will  be  none  the  more  spiritual  for  that ; 


THE  PRACTICAL  RESULT.       133 

even  though  we  call  the  act  by  the  name  of 
discipline,  and  bless  our  souls  for  our  fidelity. 
Neither  will  this  expulsion  amoimt  to  that  se- 
paration of  the  precious  from  the  vile,  of  which 
another  speaks  ;  for  what  is  the  difference  in 
the  spiritual  condition  of  a  church,  whether 
there  are  more  children  in  it  or  less  ?  Her 
character  is  to  be  drawn  from  other  considera- 
tions, and  will  be  to  the  end  of  time. 

Another  thing  belongs  to  the  .more'  excel: 
lent- way  that  has  been  indicated.  The  bap- 
tized members  of  the  church  should  be  most 
faithfully  reminded  of  the  duties  which  grow 
out  of  their  covenant  relations,  and  affection- 
ately and  earnestly  urged  to  their  perform- 
ance. One  of  these  duties,  is  the  religious 
education  of  their  children.  In  the  failure 
here,  lies  the  ground  of  the  sad  complaint ; 
and  sad  enough  it  is  we  own.  The  question 
is,  how  is  the  evil  to  be  remedied  ?  Some 
appear  to  us  to  refuse  all  remedy.  In  the 
first  place  they  w^ll  not  consent  that  the 
church  should  bind  herself  to  do  any  thing  for 
the  children.     She  must  refuse  to  receive 

them  into  her  family.     And  then,  in  the  next 
12 


134       THE  PRACTICAL  RESULT. 

place,  by  representing  the  obligation,  piously 
to  educate  children,  as  so  much  the  end  of 
baptism,  as  almost  to  reduce  to  nothing  the 
general  obligation  to  that  duty ;  and  then  by 
turning  the  baptism  of  the  parents  into  no 
baptism,  by  the  doctrine  of  virtual  expulsion, 
they  in  effect  say  to  them,  your  obligations 
are  at  an  end.  The  end  of  baptism  is  to  se- 
cure the  pious  education  of  the  children 
of  the  church ;  we  will  not  own  your 
children  as  belonging  to  the  church ;  nor 
will  we  own  your  baptism,  which  binds  you 
to  bring  them  up  in  the  nurture  and  admoni- 
tion of  the  Lord.  If  there  be  much  promise 
of  good  to  the  church,  or  to  the  children, 
either  on  the  philosophy  or  theology  of  this 
system,  we  humbly  own  that  there  is  too 
much  of  a  penumbra  about  our  senses  to 
admit  of  our  perceiving  it.  The  same  mist 
envelopes  us,  in  regard  to  the  effect  upon 
the  parentis  sense  of  religious  obligations 
in  general,  from  the  church's  heaving  him, 
and  his,  so  far  from  her  maternal  bosom. 
If  instances  can  be  named,  in  which  this 
course  of  dealing  has  given  rise  to  exercises 


THE  PRACTICAL  RESULT.       135 

of  mind,  that  have  terminated  in  piety ;  simi- 
lar references  can  be  made  to  anxious-seats 
and  dreams,  to  hobgobhns  and  to  thunder. 
Leaving  the  hidden  virtues  of  this  system  to 
those  who  can  draw  them  out,  and  apply  them 
to  spiritual  ends,  we  must  be  content  with  the 
more  common-place  doctrine,  of  holding  the 
parents  to  their  duty,  and  by  all  the  motives 
we  can  draw  from  the  justice  and  the  grace 
of  God,  bind  them  to  the  obligations  of  the 
everlasting  covenant. 

If  the  reasonings  of  this  essay  be  correct, 
then  it  is  proper  to  baptize  the  children  of  all 
parents,  who  have  been  baptized;  and  who 
had  not,  at  the  birth  of  the  children,  been  ex- 
cluded from  the  church  by  regular  and  formal 
discipline. 


JOHN    MOFFET, 
BOOKSELLER, 

JVo,  112,  Canals  treeif 

Near  Laurens-street, 
N  E  W  -  Y  O  R  K  , 

KEEPS  CONSTANTLY  ON  HAND  AN  ASSORTMENT  OF* 

JUVENILE,  CLASSICAL, 

ANO 

MISCELLANEOUS  BOOKS. 

HE   HAS    CONSIDERABLV     ENLARGED   HIS 

THEOLOGICAL  DEPARTMENT. 
12* 


The  following  are  some  of  the  more  promi- 
nent Standard  Works  : 

SCOTT  AND  HENRY'S  COMMENTARY, 

DR.  WATTS'  COMPLETE  WORKS, 

STUDENT'S  BIBLE,  Greek  and  English. 

JAHN'S  ARCHEOLOGY, 

HEBREW  BIBLES, 

STACKHOUSE'S  HISTORY  of  the  BIBLE, 

BLOOMFlELD'S  GREEK  TESTAMENT, 

HORNE'S  INTRODUCTION, 

LOWTH  ON  ISAIAH, 

HANNAH  MORE'S  WORKS, 

DICK'S  THEOLOGY, 

CALVIN  AND  HODGE  ON  ROMANS, 

CRUDEN'S  CONCORDANCE, 

GILLIES  ON  NEW  TESTAMENT, 

JAY'S  WORKS, 

HALL'S  WORKS, 

PALEY'S  WORKS,  in  six  volumes* 

HERVEY'S  WORKS, 

BUCK'S  WORKS, 


3 

HUNTER'S  SACRED  BIOGRAPHY, 
STUART  ON  HEBREWS  AND  ROMANS, 
ROMAINE'S  WORKS, 
BURKITT  ON  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT, 
BUNYAN'S  COMPLETE  WORKS, 
NEW^TON'S  WORKS,  six  volunips, 
GURNALL'S  CHRISTIAN  ARMOUR. 

ALSO,  AN  ASSORTMENT  OF 

JBlanks^  JPaper^  Quills^ 


STATIONERY  IN  GENERAL.. 

ITT  Clergymen,  Students,  and  others,  wishing 
tJheap  and  Valuable  Works,  are  invited  to  call 
Und  examine  for  themselves. 


A 

BODY   OF  DIVINITY, 

IN  A  SERIES  OF  SERMONS 

ON   THE 

SHORTER  CATECHISM, 

Composed  by  the  Reverend  Assembly  of  Divines  at 
Westminster  : 

TO   WHICH  ARE  APPENDED 

SELECT   SERMONS 

ON  VARIOUS  SUBJECTS, 

BY    THOMAS    WATSON, 

Formerly  Minister  at  St.  Stephen^s,  Wolbrooh,  London, 


CHRISTIAN  RETIREMENT; 

OR, 

SPIRITUAL  EXERCISES 

OF  THE  HEART : 

By  the  Author  of  "  Christian  Experience,  as  Dis- 
played in  the  Life  and  Writings  of  St   Paul." 

SECOND    AMERICAN,    FROM    THE    EIGHTH    LONDON 
EDITION. 


AN   INTRODUCTION 


CRITICAL  STUDY  AND  KNOWLEDGE 


HOLY  SCRIPTURES. 

BY  THOMAS  HARTWELL  HORNE,  B.D. 
OF  ST.  John's. 


THE  PULPIT  ASSISTANT: 

CONTAINING   MORE   THAN 

THESE  EUNPED  OUTLINES  01  SERMON 

CHIEFLY 

EXTRACTED  FROM  VARIOUS  AUTHORS. 

WITH   AN 

Essay  on  the  Composition  of  a  Sermon : 

BY    THE 

REV.  THOMAS  HANNAM. 


DISCOURSES 


UPON    THE 

EXISTENCE   AND   ATTRIBUTES 

OF 

GOD. 

BY  STEPHEN  CHARNOCK,  B.  D. 

Fellow  of  New  College,  Oxford. 


0k 


^ 


